Skip to main content
Glama
jshsakura

mfa-servicenow-mcp

by jshsakura

search_portal_regex_matches

Find regex matches in ServiceNow portal source code (widgets, providers, script includes) with offsets and context. Filter by scope, source type, and update dates.

Instructions

True regex over portal code (widget/provider/SI), offsets+context. Server-table keyword search: search_server_code.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
regexNoPattern to find in source
scopeNosys_scope filter
page_sizeNo
match_modeNoauto | literal | regexauto
updated_byNosys_updated_by filter
widget_idsNoWidget id/sys_id/name filter
max_matchesNo
max_widgetsNo
output_modeNominimal | compact | full
provider_idsNoAngular provider sys_id/name filter (bypasses M2M)
source_typesNowidget | script_include | angular_provider
updated_afterNosys_updated_on >= (YYYY-MM-DD)
compact_outputNoCompact output
snippet_lengthNoMax snippet length per match
updated_beforeNosys_updated_on <= (YYYY-MM-DD)
include_widget_fieldsNoWidget fields to scan
include_linked_script_includesNo
include_linked_angular_providersNo
linked_components_updated_by_onlyNo
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the core behavior (regex matching, offsets, context) but omits details like read-only nature, error handling, or performance implications.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with key behavior (true regex over portal code), no wasted words.

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?

With 19 parameters, high complexity, no output schema, and a very short description, it lacks details on return format, parameter interplay, and usage patterns.

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 68% (13 of 19 parameters described), but the description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose5/5

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

Description clearly states it performs true regex over portal code (widget/provider/SI) with offsets and context, and contrasts with server-table keyword search via sibling search_server_code.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly mentions server-table keyword search alternative (search_server_code), suggesting when to use this tool vs that sibling, but does not cover other siblings.

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

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/jshsakura/mfa-servicenow-mcp'

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