ServiceTitan MCP

dispatch_projects_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search projects by customer, location, status, dates, or linked jobs, appointments, and invoices, returning a paginated list to pinpoint the records you need.

Instructions

Search projects by IDs, customer, location, status, type, manager, dates, or linked jobs, appointments, and invoices. Returns one page; use dispatch_projects_get for a known ID.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ids`	No	Comma-separated project IDs (maximum 50)
`page`	No	Page number (starts at 1)
`sort`	No	Sort: Field (default), +Field (asc), or -Field (desc). Fields: Id, ModifiedOn, CreatedOn, Name, TargetCompletionDate
`jobId`	No	Filter by job ID
`status`	No	Project status filter
`pageSize`	No	Records per page (default 50)
`invoiceId`	No	Filter by invoice ID
`customerId`	No	Filter by customer ID
`locationId`	No	Filter by location ID
`includeTotal`	No	Include total count in response
`startsBefore`	No	Return projects starting before this UTC timestamp
`technicianId`	No	Filter by technician ID
`appointmentId`	No	Filter by appointment ID
`createdBefore`	No	Return items created before this UTC timestamp
`projectTypeId`	No	Filter by project type ID
`modifiedBefore`	No	Return items modified before this UTC timestamp
`businessUnitIds`	No	Comma-separated business unit IDs
`completedBefore`	No	Return completed projects before this UTC timestamp
`externalDataKey`	No	External data key
`startsOnOrAfter`	No	Return projects starting on or after this UTC timestamp
`createdOnOrAfter`	No	Return items created on or after this UTC timestamp
`modifiedOnOrAfter`	No	Return items modified on or after this UTC timestamp
`projectManagerIds`	No	Comma-separated manager IDs
`completedOnOrAfter`	No	Return completed projects on or after this UTC timestamp
`externalDataValues`	No	External data values (comma-separated)
`targetCompletionDateBefore`	No	Return projects with target completion before this UTC timestamp
`externalDataApplicationGuid`	No	External data application GUID
`targetCompletionDateOnOrAfter`	No	Return projects with target completion on or after this UTC timestamp

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 communicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond that by stating the one-page return behavior, which is not inferable from the annotations alone.

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 compact sentences, with the core search capability front-loaded and the important pagination caveat and get-alternative stated immediately after. No filler or repeated schema content.

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 rich input schema, output schema, and safety annotations, the description covers what is needed for effective selection: capacity, pagination behavior, and the sibling tool for known-ID lookups. Nothing critical is missing 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description provides a useful high-level grouping of filter categories, but it does not add substantial meaning beyond the per-parameter descriptions already present.

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 states a specific search/list operation over projects and enumerates the main filter dimensions (IDs, customer, location, status, type, manager, dates, linked entities). It also distinguishes itself from dispatch_projects_get, making the tool's role unambiguous among siblings.

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?

It explicitly says the tool returns one page, warning agents not to expect a full result set, and directs them to dispatch_projects_get when a known project ID is available. This gives a clear, actionable routing rule for when to use this tool versus the closest alternative.

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

Deploy Server