ServiceTitan MCP

accounting_payments_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

List customer payment transactions filtered by payment or invoice IDs, customer, batch, status, date, and amount to quickly locate matching payments.

Instructions

List one requested page of customer payment transactions using payment or applied-invoice identifiers, customer, business-unit, batch, status, date, and total-amount filters. Use accounting_payment_types_list for payment-method definitions; use accounting_ap_payments_list for vendor disbursements.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ids`	No	Comma-delimited payment IDs (max 50)
`page`	No	Page number (starts at 1)
`sort`	No	Sort: Field (default), +Field (asc), or -Field (desc). Fields: Id, CreatedOn, ModifiedOn, PaidOn, Total
`batchId`	No	Batch ID
`pageSize`	No	Records per page (default 50)
`statuses`	No	Payment statuses
`totalLess`	No	Maximum total amount
`customerId`	No	Customer ID
`batchNumber`	No	Batch number
`paidOnAfter`	No	Paid date on or after RFC3339 date-time
`includeTotal`	No	Include total count in response
`paidOnBefore`	No	Paid date on or before RFC3339 date-time
`totalGreater`	No	Minimum total amount
`createdBefore`	No
`modifiedBefore`	No
`businessUnitIds`	No	Comma-delimited business unit IDs
`transactionType`	No	Transaction type
`createdOnOrAfter`	No
`customFieldFields`	No	Custom field name/value filters
`modifiedOnOrAfter`	No
`appliedToInvoiceIds`	No	Comma-delimited invoice IDs applied to
`customFieldOperator`	No	Operator for custom field filters
`appliedToReferenceNumber`	No	Applied reference number

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 provide readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive hints, so the bar is lower. The description adds the 'one requested page' pagination behavior and the customer-payment scope, but it does not disclose any additional behavioral details such as defaults, limits, or response semantics. There is no contradiction with the annotations.

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?

The description is two sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds valuable sibling differentiation. Every sentence 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 23-parameter list tool, the description gives enough orientation through pagination, filter categories, and sibling routing, while the output schema and annotations cover return values and safety. It does not explicitly mention bulk-export alternatives like export_payments, but 'one requested page' already signals this is a paginated list rather than an export.

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 83%, so the input schema already documents most parameters well. The description lists filter categories but does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides. The date-only parameters without descriptions, such as createdBefore and modifiedBefore, are not clarified further.

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 states a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('customer payment transactions'), and a scope ('one requested page'). It also explicitly distinguishes this tool from accounting_ap_payments_list by clarifying that AP list handles vendor disbursements.

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?

The description names two sibling tools and tells the agent exactly when to use them instead: accounting_payment_types_list for payment-method definitions and accounting_ap_payments_list for vendor disbursements. This provides clear routing guidance beyond simple naming.

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

Deploy Server