Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
servicenow-api

servicenow-api

by Knuckles-Team
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Get data classification

servicenow_get_data_classification
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch data classification details for ServiceNow tables, columns, or records to support compliance and security decisions.

Instructions

Invoke the get_data_classification operation.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "servicenow_get_data_classification"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sys_idNo
table_nameNo
column_nameNo
classificationNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.4.0

TDQS

D1.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that — no indication of what data is returned, whether it reads live config vs. cached metadata, or any auth/latency considerations, so it contributes no behavioral value.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

It is a single short sentence, but the brevity comes from under-specification rather than economy — nothing meaningful is communicated, so it is not 'concise' in a useful sense.

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

Completeness1/5

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

For a tool with four undocumented parameters, no output schema, and only safety annotations, the description is completely inadequate. An agent cannot determine what inputs to supply or what the call will do.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

All four parameters (sys_id, table_name, column_name, classification) have 0% schema description coverage, and the description says nothing about them. An agent has no way to know whether these are filters, alternatives, or required together.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description 'Invoke the get_data_classification operation' merely restates the tool name and title without stating what the operation actually does or what 'data classification' means in ServiceNow. It provides no verb+resource detail beyond the identifier itself, making it a tautology.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool, when not to, or which of the many sibling tools (e.g. servicenow_get_cmdb, servicenow_get_table) it should be preferred over. The description offers no context whatsoever.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools