Local MCP

ServiceNow Create Incident

servicenow_create_incident

Destructive

Creates a real incident in the connected ServiceNow instance; the ticket is visible to the service desk as soon as it is created. Called without confirm it returns a preview of every field and sends nothing; pass confirm=true to create. urgency defaults to 3 (Medium). Returns the incident number, its sys_id and a link to it. To add to an existing incident use servicenow_add_comment or servicenow_update_incident instead of creating another.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`confirm`	No	Must be true to send; without it nothing is sent and the call returns a preview of every field.
`urgency`	No	1=Critical, 2=High, 3=Medium (default), 4=Low
`category`	No	Incident category, e.g. 'software', 'hardware', 'network'
`remember`	No	With confirm: true, also stop asking for this kind of action from now on. Only when the person said so ("don't ask again"). The person can revoke it in LMCP or with set_always_allowed.
`description`	No	Full description of the issue
`short_description`	Yes	Brief summary of the issue (required)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	No
`number`	Yes
`sys_id`	Yes
`short_description`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 24, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / remember

Added value: +{
+  "description": "With confirm: true, also stop asking for this kind of action from now on. Only when the person said so (\"don't ask again\"). The person can revoke it in LMCP or with set_always_allowed.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedOct 10, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / confirm

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Must be true to send; without it nothing is sent and the call returns a preview of every field.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

AddedSep 19, 2026
RemovedJul 31, 2026
First observedJun 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Adds genuine context beyond annotations: the preview-without-confirm safety gate, the fact the ticket is immediately visible to the service desk, and the default urgency value. Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the remaining gap is minor (no mention of rate limits or auth prerequisites).

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the core verb and side effect, then the confirm gate, then the redirect to siblings. Four compact sentences with little waste, though the urgency default and return-value sentence are somewhat redundant with the schema and output schema.

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?

For a 6-param, open-world, destructive mutation with a fully documented schema and an output schema, the description covers the key gotchas (confirm gate, visibility, sibling alternatives) and references return values briefly. It doesn't need to detail return values because an output schema exists.

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 confirm, urgency, category, remember, and short_description. The description reinforces the confirm semantics and urgency default but adds little beyond what the schema fields already state, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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+resource ('Creates a real incident in the connected ServiceNow instance') and clarifies the side effect ('visible to the service desk as soon as it is created'). It also names the sibling tools to use for other intents, so an agent can tell it apart from servicenow_update_incident and servicenow_add_comment without opening schemas.

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?

Explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance: use this to create, but use servicenow_add_comment or servicenow_update_incident for existing incidents. The confirm-preview vs confirm=true behavior is also spelled out, leaving nothing to inference.

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

All Local MCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.