ServiceNow MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Get Ci Relationships

get_ci_relationships

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve parent and child relationships for a CMDB configuration item to map dependencies, with optional filtering by relationship type and pagination.

Instructions

Get relationships for a CMDB configuration item (parent and child)

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Maximum number of relationships to return
`offset`	No	Number of relationships to skip
`sys_id`	Yes	The sys_id of the CI
`relation_type`	No	Filter by relationship type sys_id

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`note`	No
`count`	Yes
`truncated`	No
`next_offset`	No
`relationships`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.9.2Oct 23, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "count": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "next_offset": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "note": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "relationships": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": true,
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "truncated": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "count",
+    "relationships"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed3 schema fields changedv0.7.0Sep 9, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / limit

Added value: +{
+  "default": 100,
+  "description": "Maximum number of relationships to return",
+  "maximum": 1000,
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / offset

Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "description": "Number of relationships to skip",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": true,
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null

First observedv0.5.1Aug 1, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful behavioral detail that both parent and child relationships are returned, but says nothing about pagination, ordering, or whether direction can be controlled.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the resource and the parent/child scope immediately, and every phrase earns its place.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With a full input schema, an output schema, and complete annotations, the description supplies enough to call the tool correctly: it names the target CI and the relationship direction. The main missing element is routing guidance relative to sibling tools, which keeps it from a 5.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents sys_id, limit, offset, and relation_type thoroughly. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, which is the baseline case for full coverage.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (get relationships for a CMDB configuration item) and clarifies that both parent and child relationships are returned. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from nearby siblings like get_ci or find_references.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus get_ci, list_ci, or find_references, nor any mention of prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer the appropriate context entirely from the tool name.

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