ServiceTitan MCP

payroll_payroll_adjustments_get

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a specific payroll adjustment by its ID to view details. Use the list tool to search when the ID is unknown.

Instructions

Retrieve one payroll adjustment by its required ID. Use payroll_payroll_adjustments_list to search when the ID is unknown.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Payroll adjustment ID
`employeeType`	No	Employee type

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

A4.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is well covered. The description adds matching context about retrieving a single record by ID but does not disclose additional behavior such as not-found handling or effects of the optional employeeType parameter. This is adequate for a simple read-only getter.

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 consists of two tight sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core operation first and then gives the necessary routing instruction to the list alternative.

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 tool's low complexity, complete schema documentation, rich annotations, output schema, and explicit sibling routing, nothing essential is missing. The description is sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 id and employeeType are already well documented in the input schema. The description only reinforces that the ID is required and does not add new semantic detail beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieve one payroll adjustment' by ID. It clearly distinguishes this from the sibling list tool by explicitly naming payroll_payroll_adjustments_list for the case where the ID is unknown.

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 tells the agent when to use this tool versus the alternative: use this when the ID is known, and use payroll_payroll_adjustments_list to search when the ID is unknown. This provides a clear selection rule.

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

Deploy Server