ServiceTitan MCP

dispatch_jobs_canceled_logs_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

List cancellation log entries for a known job ID to audit cancellation details and history.

Instructions

List one page of cancellation log entries for a known job ID. Use this for cancellation audit details rather than the current job or cancellation-reason catalog.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

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

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

A4.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that this returns one page of historical cancellation audit entries for a specific job, but does not disclose ordering, empty-result behavior, or pagination details beyond 'one page'.

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 short sentences front-load the core operation and usage guidance, with no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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, read-only list operation, the description plus input schema and annotations are sufficient. Since an output schema exists, the description does not need to explain return values, and no critical calling information is missing.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% and every parameter (id, page, pageSize, includeTotal) already has a description. The tool description adds little beyond 'known job ID', so it does not meaningfully improve on the schema's parameter documentation.

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?

States a specific verb and resource—'List one page of cancellation log entries for a known job ID'—and clearly differentiates from current-job data and cancellation-reason catalogs. An agent can tell what this tool does without needing to inspect the schema or infer from the name.

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?

Gives explicit usage context: 'Use this for cancellation audit details rather than the current job or cancellation-reason catalog.' This clearly scopes when to use it, though it does not explicitly name the alternative sibling tools such as export_job_canceled_logs for bulk or unpaginated exports.

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

Deploy Server