Skip to main content
Glama
JLKmach

ServiceNow MCP Server

by JLKmach

delete_script_include

Remove script includes from ServiceNow to eliminate unused code, reduce system clutter, and maintain clean development environments.

Instructions

Delete a script include in ServiceNow

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
script_include_idYesScript include ID or name

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function that retrieves the script include details and performs the DELETE API call to remove it from ServiceNow.
    def delete_script_include(
        config: ServerConfig,
        auth_manager: AuthManager,
        params: DeleteScriptIncludeParams,
    ) -> ScriptIncludeResponse:
        """Delete a script include from ServiceNow.
        
        Args:
            config: The server configuration.
            auth_manager: The authentication manager.
            params: The parameters for the request.
            
        Returns:
            A response indicating the result of the operation.
        """
        # First, get the script include to delete
        get_params = GetScriptIncludeParams(script_include_id=params.script_include_id)
        get_result = get_script_include(config, auth_manager, get_params)
        
        if not get_result["success"]:
            return ScriptIncludeResponse(
                success=False,
                message=get_result["message"],
            )
            
        script_include = get_result["script_include"]
        sys_id = script_include["sys_id"]
        name = script_include["name"]
        
        # Build the URL
        url = f"{config.instance_url}/api/now/table/sys_script_include/{sys_id}"
        
        # Make the request
        headers = auth_manager.get_headers()
        
        try:
            response = requests.delete(
                url,
                headers=headers,
                timeout=30,
            )
            response.raise_for_status()
            
            return ScriptIncludeResponse(
                success=True,
                message=f"Deleted script include: {name}",
                script_include_id=sys_id,
                script_include_name=name,
            )
            
        except Exception as e:
            logger.error(f"Error deleting script include: {e}")
            return ScriptIncludeResponse(
                success=False,
                message=f"Error deleting script include: {str(e)}",
            ) 
  • Pydantic BaseModel defining the input parameters for the delete_script_include tool, requiring a script_include_id (sys_id or name).
    class DeleteScriptIncludeParams(BaseModel):
        """Parameters for deleting a script include."""
        
        script_include_id: str = Field(..., description="Script include ID or name")
  • Registration of the 'delete_script_include' tool in the central tool_definitions dictionary used by the MCP server, linking the handler function, schema, description, and serialization method.
    "delete_script_include": (
        delete_script_include_tool,
        DeleteScriptIncludeParams,
        str,  # Expects JSON string
        "Delete a script include in ServiceNow",
        "json_dict",  # Tool returns Pydantic model
    ),
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool performs a deletion, implying a destructive mutation, but doesn't disclose critical behaviors like whether deletion is permanent or reversible, what permissions are required, if there are confirmation prompts, or what happens on success/failure. For a destructive tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in safety and operational context.

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 a single, clear sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the key action ('Delete') and resource, making it immediately actionable. Every part of the sentence earns its place by specifying the tool's core function without redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given this is a destructive mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like permanence, error handling, or return values, which are critical for safe agent operation. The high schema coverage helps with parameters, but the overall context lacks necessary warnings and operational details for a deletion tool.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the single parameter 'script_include_id' documented as 'Script include ID or name'. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific details beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or validation rules. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the schema handles the parameter documentation adequately.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Delete') and resource ('a script include in ServiceNow'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'create_script_include' and 'update_script_include' by specifying the destructive operation. However, it doesn't specify what constitutes a 'script include' beyond the context, leaving some ambiguity about the resource type.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing script include), exclusions, or related tools like 'get_script_include' for verification. The description lacks context about typical workflows, such as using it after checking details with 'get_script_include' or as part of cleanup operations.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/JLKmach/servicenow-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server