Skip to main content
Glama
echelon-ai-labs

ServiceNow MCP Server

delete_workflow_activity

Remove a specific activity from a ServiceNow workflow by specifying its activity ID or sys_id using this tool. Ideal for managing and updating workflows efficiently.

Instructions

Delete an activity from a workflow

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsYes

Implementation Reference

  • Implements the core logic for the delete_workflow_activity tool by sending a DELETE request to the ServiceNow wf_activity table endpoint.
    def delete_workflow_activity(
        auth_manager: AuthManager,
        server_config: ServerConfig,
        params: Dict[str, Any],
    ) -> Dict[str, Any]:
        """
        Delete an activity from a workflow.
        
        Args:
            auth_manager: Authentication manager
            server_config: Server configuration
            params: Parameters for deleting a workflow activity
            
        Returns:
            Dict[str, Any]: Result of the deletion operation
        """
        # Unwrap parameters if needed
        params = _unwrap_params(params, DeleteWorkflowActivityParams)
        
        # Get the correct auth_manager and server_config
        try:
            auth_manager, server_config = _get_auth_and_config(auth_manager, server_config)
        except ValueError as e:
            logger.error(f"Error getting auth and config: {e}")
            return {"error": str(e)}
        
        activity_id = params.get("activity_id")
        if not activity_id:
            return {"error": "Activity ID is required"}
        
        # Make the API request
        try:
            headers = auth_manager.get_headers()
            url = f"{server_config.instance_url}/api/now/table/wf_activity/{activity_id}"
            
            response = requests.delete(url, headers=headers)
            response.raise_for_status()
            
            return {
                "message": "Activity deleted successfully",
                "activity_id": activity_id,
            }
        except requests.RequestException as e:
            logger.error(f"Error deleting workflow activity: {e}")
            return {"error": str(e)}
        except Exception as e:
            logger.error(f"Unexpected error deleting workflow activity: {e}")
            return {"error": str(e)}
  • Pydantic model defining the input parameters for the delete_workflow_activity tool, requiring an activity_id.
    class DeleteWorkflowActivityParams(BaseModel):
        """Parameters for deleting a workflow activity."""
        
        activity_id: str = Field(..., description="Activity ID or sys_id")
  • Registers the delete_workflow_activity tool in the MCP tool definitions dictionary, specifying the handler function alias, params model, return type, description, and serialization method.
    "delete_workflow_activity": (
        delete_workflow_activity_tool,
        DeleteWorkflowActivityParams,
        str,
        "Delete an activity from a workflow",
        "str",  # Tool returns simple message
    ),
  • Imports the delete_workflow_activity function from workflow_tools.py to expose it at the tools package level.
    from servicenow_mcp.tools.workflow_tools import (
        activate_workflow,
        add_workflow_activity,
        create_workflow,
        deactivate_workflow,
        delete_workflow_activity,
        get_workflow_activities,
        get_workflow_details,
        list_workflow_versions,
        list_workflows,
        reorder_workflow_activities,
        update_workflow,
        update_workflow_activity,
    )
  • Imports the delete_workflow_activity function aliased as delete_workflow_activity_tool for use in tool registration.
    from servicenow_mcp.tools.workflow_tools import (
        delete_workflow_activity as delete_workflow_activity_tool,
    )
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. While 'Delete' implies a destructive operation, it doesn't specify whether deletion is permanent, requires special permissions, affects workflow integrity, or has confirmation steps. This is inadequate for a destructive 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 zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple operation and front-loads the essential information (delete + target).

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 destructive tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral risks, parameter details, or expected outcomes. Given the complexity of workflow management and sibling tools, more context is needed for safe and effective use.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the schema provides no parameter documentation. The description mentions 'activity' but doesn't explain what an 'activity_id' represents, its format, or how to obtain it. It adds minimal semantic value beyond what's implied by the tool name.

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 target ('an activity from a workflow'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'delete_script_include' or explain what makes workflow activities different from other deletable entities.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., whether the workflow must be deactivated first), consequences of deletion, or relationships to sibling tools like 'reorder_workflow_activities' or 'get_workflow_activities'.

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

Related 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/echelon-ai-labs/servicenow-mcp'

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