Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to snowmcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Connects AI assistants to a ServiceNow instance, providing tools for Table API CRUD, incident lifecycle, CMDB queries, knowledge search, and user lookup.
      38 npm
      MIT
    • F
      license
      B
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables authenticated interaction with a ServiceNow Personal Developer Instance through OAuth 2.0, exposing tools to test connectivity and perform generic CRUD operations on any ServiceNow table plus flow management on the sys_hub_flow table.
      10
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables MCP-capable AI agents to safely read and write ServiceNow records via the Table API, including querying, creating, updating records, running server-side scripts, and triggering CI/CD tests and scans.
      MIT
    • F
      license
      A
      quality
      F
      maintenance
      AI-powered ServiceNow developer toolkit for Claude Code with 116 tools covering script generation, code review, portal and catalog development, notifications, user and group management, CRUD operations, dictionary overrides, data migration, bidirectional integrations, ATF testing, performance analysis, technical documentation, and issue diagnosis.
      100
      1
      -
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to interact with ServiceNow through MCP, providing schema inspection, record CRUD, attachments, audit, Flow Designer, and platform investigations with policy-guarded access.
      15
      1,918 PyPI
      4
      MIT

    TDQS

    A3.5/5.0

    Scored across 13 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Tools are cleanly partitioned by domain (schema, read, write, aggregate, graph, catalog, files, code, ops, knowledge, state, journal, admin), so an agent can generally pick the right one. Minor overlap remains: sn_ops action=stats versus sn_aggregate action=stats, and sn_code action=where_used versus sn_graph action=impact, though their descriptions mostly clarify the intended scope.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow a strict sn_<domain> snake_case pattern with no mixing of conventions. The action=... parameter style is used uniformly across every multi-action tool, making the surface highly predictable.

    Tool Count5/5

    Thirteen tools is well-scoped for a broad platform like ServiceNow, and the multi-action design consolidates many operations into coherent domains. Each tool earns its place without bloating the surface.

    Completeness5/5

    The surface covers the full lifecycle: schema introspection, CRUD via sn_read/sn_write, aggregation, CMDB graph traversal, catalog ordering, attachments, code search, instance operations, local memory, write journaling/undo, and admin surfaces. No obvious dead ends for the stated ServiceNow automation purpose.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues