ServiceTitan MCP

crm_bookings_provider_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch bookings for a specific provider using IDs, external ID, or creation/modification date ranges. Paginate, sort, and filter to locate the needed records.

Instructions

Search one booking provider's bookings by IDs, external ID, or created and modified ranges. Returns one page and requires the provider ID.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ids`	No	Comma-delimited booking IDs (max 50)
`page`	No	Page number (starts at 1)
`sort`	No	Sort: Field (default), +Field (asc), or -Field (desc). Fields: Id, ModifiedOn, CreatedOn
`pageSize`	No	Records per page (default 50)
`externalId`	No	External booking ID
`includeTotal`	No	Include total count in response
`createdBefore`	No
`modifiedBefore`	No
`bookingProvider`	Yes	Booking provider ID
`createdOnOrAfter`	No
`modifiedOnOrAfter`	No

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

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: it returns only one page and is scoped to a single booking provider. No contradiction with 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 one compact sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core action and resource, then immediately states the key constraint ('requires the provider ID') and the pagination behavior.

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?

Given the output schema, annotations, and schema descriptions for most parameters, the description is adequately complete. It covers the essential provider scoping, filter categories, and one-page return behavior. It could have explicitly pointed to related booking-list tools, but this is a minor gap rather than a blocking one.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 64%, so the description adds value by grouping parameters into meaningful filter categories: IDs, external ID, and created/modified date ranges. It also clarifies the role of the required bookingProvider parameter. Some parameters like page, sort, pageSize, and includeTotal are not explained in the description, but they already have schema descriptions.

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 ('Search'), identifies the resource ('one booking provider's bookings'), and lists search dimensions (IDs, external ID, created/modified ranges). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like crm_bookings_list, which is not provider-scoped, and crm_bookings_provider_get, which fetches provider details rather than bookings.

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 states the key precondition: 'requires the provider ID.' It also communicates the intended filtering use cases. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use this tool, but the provider-scoped context is clear enough for an agent to choose it appropriately.

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

Deploy Server