ServiceTitan MCP

crm_bookings_provider_contacts_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch a page of contacts linked to a booking by supplying the booking provider ID and booking ID. Useful for viewing customer contact details in ServiceTitan.

Instructions

List one page of contacts for a booking within a specified booking provider. Requires both provider and booking IDs.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Booking ID
`page`	No	Page number (starts at 1)
`pageSize`	No	Records per page (default 50)
`includeTotal`	No	Include total count in response
`bookingProvider`	Yes	Booking provider ID

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"
+}

First observedv2.5.1Apr 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already convey read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds the key behavioral detail that it lists only one page at a time, and it emphasizes that both provider and booking IDs are required, which is important for correct invocation.

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 tight sentences: the first states the action and resource, the second states the prerequisite. No filler or repetition of schema details; every sentence earns its place.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a simple paginated list with full schema coverage, a read-only annotation set, and an output schema, the description is complete. An agent has enough information to select and invoke the tool correctly without additional context.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters including page, pageSize, and includeTotal. The description reinforces the two required identifiers but does not add new meaning beyond the schema, matching the baseline of 3.

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 uses a specific verb ('List'), a precise resource ('contacts for a booking within a specified booking provider'), and states the required scope. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling crm_bookings_contacts_list, which lacks the provider qualifier.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives clear context: use this when you need a page of contacts for a booking and you have both the booking provider and booking IDs. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the provider-scoped wording makes the intended context clear.

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

Deploy Server