Skip to main content
Glama
jschuller

ServiceNow MCP Server

by jschuller
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Update Ci

update_ci
DestructiveIdempotent

Update a ServiceNow CMDB configuration item by providing its sys_id and new attribute values. Specify the CI class to target the correct record type.

Instructions

Update a CMDB configuration item

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesCI attributes to update
sys_idYesThe sys_id of the CI to update
confirmNoAcknowledge this destructive change. Only consulted when the server runs with --write-confirm and the client cannot show a confirmation dialog; ignored otherwise.
class_nameNoCMDB class namecmdb_ci

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.7.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirm
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Acknowledge this destructive change. Only consulted when the server runs with --write-confirm and the client cannot show a confirmation dialog; ignored otherwise.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": true,
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. First observedv0.5.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveness and read-only status, but the description adds nothing about side effects, confirmation behavior, or idempotency. It relies entirely on annotations.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and object. Efficient, though it provides minimal information beyond the bare operation.

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?

Lacks any mention of expected output, error conditions, or confirmation flow. The nested 'data' object and destructive hint are not addressed in the description, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent.

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 covers all four parameters with descriptions, but the description does not clarify whether 'data' is a partial update or full replacement, or how 'confirm' interacts with destructive changes. Meets baseline for full schema coverage but no extra value.

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 ('update') and resource ('CMDB configuration item'), but does not differentiate from the generic 'update_record' sibling tool. It is clear enough for a CI-specific operation.

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 on when to use this vs. alternatives like 'update_record' or 'create_ci'. The description lacks any context for selection.

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