ServiceTitan MCP

accounting_gl_accounts_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

List general-ledger accounts page by page, using filters for IDs, names, numbers, types, source, description, and Intacct flags to locate the exact accounts you need.

Instructions

List one requested page of general-ledger accounts, with filters for IDs, names, numbers, types, subtypes, source, description, and Intacct flags. Use accounting_gl_accounts_get for one known account and accounting_gl_account_types_list to resolve account-type metadata.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ids`	No	Comma-delimited account IDs (max 50)
`page`	No	Page number (starts at 1)
`sort`	No	Sort: Field (default), +Field (asc), or -Field (desc). Fields: Id, Name, Number, ModifiedOn, CreatedOn
`names`	No	Comma-delimited account names (max 50)
`types`	No	Comma-delimited account types (max 50)
`active`	No	Filter by active status	True
`source`	No	Account source
`numbers`	No	Comma-delimited account numbers (max 50)
`pageSize`	No	Records per page (default 50)
`subtypes`	No	Comma-delimited account subtypes (max 50)
`description`	No	Description contains value
`includeTotal`	No	Include total count in response
`createdBefore`	No
`isIntacctGroup`	No	Only Intacct group accounts
`modifiedBefore`	No
`createdOnOrAfter`	No
`modifiedOnOrAfter`	No
`isIntacctBankAccount`	No	Only Intacct bank accounts

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv3.0.0Sep 6, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {},
+  "type": "object"
+}

Addedv2.6.2Jul 21, 2026
Removedv2.6.2Jul 21, 2026
First observedv2.5.1Apr 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds that results are paged ('one requested page') and lists available filter dimensions, which is useful but doesn't disclose pagination behavior, defaults, or response envelope—though the output schema helps fill that gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and filter summary, followed by sibling routing. No filler, and each phrase earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only list tool with a rich 18-parameter schema, output schema, and safety annotations, the description covers the essential context: what it lists, its filter scope, and the relevant sibling tools. It doesn't explain sort/includeTotal/date-filter details, but those are documented in the schema, so the description is nearly complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 78%, close to high, and most parameters carry detailed descriptions and enums. The description adds a helpful summary of the filter categories (IDs, names, numbers, types, subtypes, source, description, Intacct flags) but doesn't elaborate on page, pageSize, sort, or date-window semantics. The schema remains the primary source of parameter meaning.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource ('List one requested page of general-ledger accounts') and explicitly names sibling tools with different purposes: accounting_gl_accounts_get for a single known account and accounting_gl_account_types_list for account-type metadata. An agent can distinguish this tool from nearby siblings without opening the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It states when to use alternatives: use accounting_gl_accounts_get for one known account and accounting_gl_account_types_list to resolve account-type metadata. This gives an agent clear routing logic: for paged/filtered listing use this tool, for single-record lookup use the get variant.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server