Skip to main content
Glama

List Record Attachments

servicenow_list_attachments
Read-onlyIdempotent

List attachments for ServiceNow records or tables, filter by filename substring, and retrieve metadata with download links and paginated results.

Instructions

List file attachments for a ServiceNow record or query across all attachments.

Args:

  • table_name (string): Table the attachment belongs to (e.g., incident, change_request)

  • table_sys_id (string): sys_id of the specific record. Leave empty to list all attachments for the table.

  • file_name_contains (string): Filter by filename substring

  • limit / offset: Pagination

  • response_format: Output format

Returns: Attachment metadata including filename, content type, size, and download link

Examples:

  • List attachments on INC0001234 → table_name="incident", table_sys_id=""

  • Find all PDFs on change requests → table_name="change_request", file_name_contains=".pdf"

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of results to return (1–100, default 20)
offsetNoNumber of results to skip for pagination (default 0)
table_nameYesServiceNow table name (e.g., incident, change_request, sys_user)
table_sys_idNosys_id of the parent record (empty = all records in table)
response_formatNoOutput format: 'markdown' (default) for human-readable or 'json' for structured datamarkdown
file_name_containsNoFilter by filename substring
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, establishing a safe read-only operation. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying that it returns attachment metadata including filename, content type, size, and download link, and that a blank table_sys_id queries across all attachments. No contradictions with annotations.

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 well-structured with Args, Returns, and Examples sections. Each sentence provides necessary information without fluff. It is front-loaded with the main purpose, making it easy to scan and understand quickly.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the rich annotations and 100% schema coverage, the description still manages to add essential context: it describes the return format (metadata with download link) and gives concrete examples for typical use cases. No critical information is missing for an AI agent to correctly select and invoke this tool.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Input schema has 100% coverage for all 6 parameters, so baseline is 3. The description adds value with practical examples (e.g., INC0001234, .pdf filter) and clarifies that leaving table_sys_id empty lists all attachments for the table. This goes beyond the schema's basic descriptions, earning a 4.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's function: 'List file attachments for a ServiceNow record or query across all attachments.' It uses a specific verb (list) and resource (file attachments), and the scope (by record or across all attachments) distinguishes it from related tools like get_attachment_content or upload_attachment.

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?

The description provides clear usage examples ('List attachments on INC0001234', 'Find all PDFs on change requests') that illustrate typical scenarios. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool (e.g., if downloading content, use get_attachment_content), so it lacks explicit exclusions or alternative tool references.

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/kylburns89/servicenow-mcp-server'

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