Skip to main content
Glama
JLKmach

ServiceNow MCP Server

by JLKmach

publish_changeset

Publish a ServiceNow changeset to deploy configuration changes to production environments, requiring a changeset ID and optional notes.

Instructions

Publish a changeset in ServiceNow

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
changeset_idYesChangeset ID or sys_id
publish_notesNoNotes for publishing

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function that executes the publish_changeset tool logic: validates params, makes PATCH request to ServiceNow sys_update_set table to set state to 'published', returns success or error.
    def publish_changeset(
        auth_manager: AuthManager,
        server_config: ServerConfig,
        params: Union[Dict[str, Any], PublishChangesetParams],
    ) -> Dict[str, Any]:
        """
        Publish a changeset in ServiceNow.
    
        Args:
            auth_manager: The authentication manager.
            server_config: The server configuration.
            params: The parameters for publishing a changeset. Can be a dictionary or a PublishChangesetParams object.
    
        Returns:
            The published changeset.
        """
        # Unwrap and validate parameters
        result = _unwrap_and_validate_params(
            params, 
            PublishChangesetParams, 
            required_fields=["changeset_id"]
        )
        
        if not result["success"]:
            return result
        
        validated_params = result["params"]
        
        # Get the instance URL
        instance_url = _get_instance_url(auth_manager, server_config)
        if not instance_url:
            return {
                "success": False,
                "message": "Cannot find instance_url in either server_config or auth_manager",
            }
        
        # Get the headers
        headers = _get_headers(auth_manager, server_config)
        if not headers:
            return {
                "success": False,
                "message": "Cannot find get_headers method in either auth_manager or server_config",
            }
        
        # Add Content-Type header
        headers["Content-Type"] = "application/json"
        
        # Prepare the request data for the publish action
        data = {
            "state": "published",
        }
        
        # Add publish notes if provided
        if validated_params.publish_notes:
            data["description"] = validated_params.publish_notes
        
        # Make the API request
        url = f"{instance_url}/api/now/table/sys_update_set/{validated_params.changeset_id}"
        
        try:
            response = requests.patch(url, json=data, headers=headers)
            response.raise_for_status()
            
            result = response.json()
            
            return {
                "success": True,
                "message": "Changeset published successfully",
                "changeset": result["result"],
            }
        except requests.exceptions.RequestException as e:
            logger.error(f"Error publishing changeset: {e}")
            return {
                "success": False,
                "message": f"Error publishing changeset: {str(e)}",
            }
  • Pydantic BaseModel defining the input schema for the publish_changeset tool, with required changeset_id and optional publish_notes.
    class PublishChangesetParams(BaseModel):
        """Parameters for publishing a changeset."""
    
        changeset_id: str = Field(..., description="Changeset ID or sys_id")
        publish_notes: Optional[str] = Field(None, description="Notes for publishing")
  • Registration of the publish_changeset tool in the central tool_definitions dictionary used by the MCP server, mapping name to (handler, schema, return_type, description, serialization).
    "publish_changeset": (
        publish_changeset_tool,
        PublishChangesetParams,
        str,
        "Publish a changeset in ServiceNow",
        "str",  # Tool returns simple message
    ),
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Publish' implies a write/mutation operation that likely makes changes visible or activates them, but the description doesn't explain what publishing actually does, whether it requires specific permissions, if it's reversible, what side effects it has, or what the typical response looks like. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a tool with only two parameters and gets straight to the point without 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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what publishing entails, what happens after publishing, potential side effects, or error conditions. Given the complexity implied by the sibling tools (multiple changeset operations) and the lack of structured behavioral information, the description should provide more operational context.

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 fully documents both parameters (changeset_id and publish_notes). The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, such as format requirements for changeset_id or content guidelines for publish_notes. The baseline of 3 is appropriate when the schema does all the parameter documentation work.

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 ('Publish') and the resource ('a changeset in ServiceNow'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'commit_changeset' or 'update_changeset', which appear to be related operations on the same 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are multiple sibling tools dealing with changesets (commit_changeset, update_changeset, get_changeset_details, list_changesets), but the description doesn't explain the relationship between publishing and these other operations or when publishing is appropriate.

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