ServiceTitan MCP

dispatch_jobs_list_attachments

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get paginated attachments for a job, optionally filtered by creation date and sorted. Use it to find files tied to a job.

Instructions

List one page of attachments for a known job, optionally filtered by creation time and sorted. Returned records identify files attached to that job.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No	Page number (starts at 1)
`sort`	No	Sort: Field (default), +Field (asc), or -Field (desc). Fields: Id, CreatedOn
`jobId`	Yes	Job ID
`pageSize`	No	Records per page (default 50)
`includeTotal`	No	Include total count in response
`createdBefore`	No	Return items created before this UTC timestamp
`createdOnOrAfter`	No	Return items created on or after this UTC timestamp

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv3.0.0Sep 6, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / modifiedBefore

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Return items modified before this UTC timestamp",
-  "format": "date-time",
-  "type": "string"
-}

removedInput schema / properties / modifiedOnOrAfter

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Return items modified on or after this UTC timestamp",
-  "format": "date-time",
-  "type": "string"
-}

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

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safe read behavior is covered. The description adds the useful 'one page' and 'identify files' context, but does not disclose additional behaviors such as error cases or relationship to attachment retrieval.

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 front-loaded sentences with no filler. The core action, scope, and return-value semantics are all present, and every sentence contributes necessary information.

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?

Given the comprehensive input schema, output schema, and safety annotations, the description is sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly. It clarifies that the result is one page, that records identify attachments, and that filtering/sorting are optional.

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 seven parameters. The description paraphrases the time filters and sorting and notes a known jobId, but it does not add syntax or meaning beyond the schema, keeping it at the high-coverage baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states a specific verb and resource ('List one page of attachments for a known job'), with optional filters and sorting. It is unambiguous but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools such as dispatch_jobs_get_attachment or dispatch_jobs_list, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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?

It gives a clear context: use this when listing attachments for an already-known job, with pagination and time filters. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the prerequisite and use case are clear.

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

Deploy Server