ServiceTitan MCP

dispatch_jobs_history_get

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the complete audit history for a known job ID as one unpaged resource. Use this to track job changes over time, while the current job record is obtained separately.

Instructions

Retrieve the history response for a known job ID as one unpaged audit resource. Use dispatch_jobs_get for the current job record rather than its historical changes.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Job 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

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by noting the response is a single unpaged audit resource, which conveys pagination behavior and the historical nature of the data beyond 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 wasted words. The primary purpose is front-loaded, and the comparison with dispatch_jobs_get is both relevant and concise.

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 single-parameter read-only tool with an output schema and comprehensive annotations, the description provides all necessary context. It explains the resource, the singular unpaged nature, and the alternative tool, leaving no significant gaps for correct invocation.

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?

The input schema already fully describes the only parameter, 'id', as 'Job ID' with 100% coverage. The description adds little beyond referring to a 'known job ID', which only slightly reinforces that the ID must exist. This matches the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves the history response for a known job ID, and identifies it as an unpaged audit resource. It distinguishes itself from dispatch_jobs_get by explicitly contrasting historical changes with the current job record.

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 explicitly directs the agent to use dispatch_jobs_get when the current job record is needed rather than historical changes. It also establishes that the tool is for a known job ID, making 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