Skip to main content
Glama
jshsakura

mfa-servicenow-mcp

by jshsakura
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

manage_flow_designer

Inspect and analyze ServiceNow Flow Designer flows, subflows, conditions, executions, and action source code, including cross-instance comparisons, without modifying anything.

Instructions

Flow Designer read/analyse: structure, conditions, executions, cross-instance compare, action source. Read-only - edit flows in the Flow Designer UI.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
queryNo
scopeNoScope namespace
actionYesWhat to read
offsetNo
flow_idNoFlow sys_id; get_detail also accepts flow_name instead
node_idNoAction/logic/trigger instance id; on get_detail reads that ONE step in full
flow_nameNoFlow name: get_detail exact/contains lookup, or executions filter
flow_typeNoflow (default) | subflow | all | action | playbook | decision
action_refNoAction sys_id/name; discover via action=list with flow_type=action
context_idNoExecution sys_id (sys_flow_context)
count_onlyNo
exec_stateNoComplete/Error/Waiting/Cancelled/In Progress
trace_pillNoTrace data pill through flow
errors_onlyNo
flow_statusNoStatus: Draft/Published/etc
name_filterNoName contains-match
source_tableNoTable to resolve a source_record number in (default task)
source_recordNoTriggering record: sys_id, or its number (see source_table)
summary_formatNoCompact format; False = raw JSON
include_inactiveNo
include_triggersNo
include_versionsNo
include_structureNo
include_subflow_treeNo
include_executions_summaryNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.25.4
    • changedInput schema / properties / source_record / description
      Previous value: -"Source record display value"New value: +"Triggering record: sys_id, or its number (see source_table)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / source_table
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Table to resolve a source_record number in (default task)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.24.83
    • changedInput schema / properties / action / description
      Previous value: -"Read-only: list/get_detail/get_executions/compare/get_action_source/read_action. Edit flows in the Flow Designer UI."New value: +"What to read"
    • removedInput schema / properties / confirm
      Removed value: -{
-  "enum": [
-    "approve"
-  ],
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / confirm_publish
      Removed value: -{
-  "enum": [
-    "approve"
-  ],
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "action",
-  "confirm"
-]New value: +[
+  "action"
+]
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv1.24.67
    • changedInput schema / properties / action / description
      Previous value: -"Writes (checkout/set_*/add_branch/save/publish/activate/deactivate/copy/update) need browser auth; rest are reads."New value: +"Read-only: list/get_detail/get_executions/compare/get_action_source/read_action. Edit flows in the Flow Designer UI."
  4. Changed1 schema field changedv1.24.61
    • addedInput schema / properties / node_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Action/logic/trigger instance id; on get_detail reads that ONE step in full",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  5. Changed1 schema field changedv1.23.8
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirm_publish
      Added value: +{
+  "enum": [
+    "approve"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  6. Addedv1.21.20
  7. Removedv1.21.13
  8. First observedv1.18.41

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden; it does disclose the most important trait — that everything is read-only and mutations must happen in the UI. It says nothing about pagination (limit/offset defaults), rate limits, response shape, or whether include_* flags are expensive, all of which matter for a 26-parameter tool.

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?

Two compact clauses, front-loaded with purpose followed by the read-only constraint; every word earns its place. It is arguably over-terse for a tool of this size, but there is no filler or redundancy.

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 tool with 26 parameters, 4 actions, no annotations, and no output schema, this description is far too thin. It leaves the agent to discover action-parameter coupling, output format differences (summary_format vs raw JSON), and pagination behaviour entirely on its own.

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 coverage is only 58% across 26 parameters, and the description adds almost no parameter meaning beyond echoing capability areas like 'conditions' and 'executions'. Critically, it never explains which parameters apply to which of the four actions, even though only 1 of 26 is required — the agent has no guidance on the legal parameter combinations per action.

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 clear verb (read/analyse) and resource (Flow Designer), and enumerates the capability surface: structure, conditions, executions, cross-instance compare, action source. It differentiates from a likely sibling (manage_workflow) only implicitly by noting it is read-only, and never names the alternative tool outright.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The phrase 'Read-only - edit flows in the Flow Designer UI' gives one explicit when-not-to-use rule, which is useful. However, with four selectable actions and no mapping of which action suits which intent, the agent must infer usage from action enum values and parameter names alone.

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