ServiceTitan MCP

intel_technician_scorecard

Read-onlyIdempotent

Build technician scorecards from ServiceTitan reports for any date range—revenue, conversions, productivity, recalls, upsells, lead metrics. Filter by technician or business unit.

Instructions

Build a technician scorecard for the selected date range from ServiceTitan technician reports. Returns revenue, converted jobs, opportunities, conversion, productivity, recalls, upsells, and lead-generation metrics; includeExtendedMetrics adds membership and tech/marketing-lead sales reports. Filter by technician or business unit when comparing a subset, and use limit to bound ranked results. Report calls may wait for per-report/client spacing, and partial source failures are returned in _warnings.

Examples:

"How are our techs performing this month?" -> startDate="2026-03-01", endDate="2026-04-01"
"Show me Andrew's numbers for Q1" -> startDate="2026-01-01", endDate="2026-04-01", technicianName="Andrew"
"Who is our top performer this year?" -> startDate="2026-01-01", endDate="2026-03-10"

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Max technicians to analyze (default 25, max 50)
`endDate`	Yes	End date (YYYY-MM-DD)
`startDate`	Yes	Start date (YYYY-MM-DD)
`technicianId`	No	Single technician (omit for all)
`businessUnitId`	No	Filter by business unit
`technicianName`	No	Single technician by name (resolved via cache, e.g. 'John'). Alternative to technicianId.
`businessUnitName`	No	Filter by business unit name (resolved via cache, e.g. 'HVAC'). Alternative to businessUnitId.
`includeExtendedMetrics`	No	Include memberships sold and sales from technician and marketing leads by running Reports 171, 173, and 174. Default: false.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv3.0.1Sep 6, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / includeExtendedMetrics / description

Previous value: -"Include memberships sold, sales from tech leads, and sales from marketing leads (Reports 171/173/174). Adds ~0.5-1s latency. Default: false."New value: +"Include memberships sold and sales from technician and marketing leads by running Reports 171, 173, and 174. Default: false."

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 mark the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds useful runtime context: report calls may wait for per-report/client spacing, and partial source failures are returned in _warnings. This goes beyond the schema and annotations without contradicting them.

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 front-loaded with purpose and metrics, then moves to filter/limit guidance, behavioral warnings, and examples. Every sentence adds value; there is no redundant repetition of schema defaults or annotation facts.

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 and rich annotations, the description covers purpose, filtering, limit usage, latency, and failure reporting. The only small gap is that the ranking order for 'top performer' is not specified, but the output schema and example queries mostly compensate.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining that includeExtendedMetrics runs Reports 171, 173, and 174, that filters are for comparing a subset, and that limit bounds ranked results. The examples also show how startDate and endDate are intended to be combined with optional filters.

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 ('Build') and resource ('technician scorecard') and enumerates the returned metrics: revenue, converted jobs, opportunities, conversion, productivity, recalls, upsells, and lead-generation metrics. This clearly identifies the tool's function and differentiates it from sibling intel_* and people_* tools that focus on revenue summaries, membership health, or employee performance.

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?

Provides clear usage context: selected date range, optional technician/business-unit filters for subset comparison, and limit for bounding ranked results. Includes three concrete example queries mapping natural language to parameters. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or conditions when not to use this tool, so exclusion guidance is missing.

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

Deploy Server