Skip to main content
Glama

List Incidents

servicenow_list_incidents
Read-onlyIdempotent

Query ServiceNow incidents by state, priority, assignment, or date to retrieve matching records with status and timestamps.

Instructions

List and search ServiceNow incidents with filters.

Args:

  • query (string): Encoded query (e.g., 'state=1', 'priority=1^assignment_group.name=Service Desk', 'opened_at>=2024-01-01'). Empty = all open incidents.

  • limit (number): Max results (1–100, default 20)

  • offset (number): Pagination offset

  • response_format: 'markdown' or 'json'

Common query examples:

  • All new incidents: 'state=1'

  • My assigned incidents: 'assigned_to=javascript:gs.getUserID()'

  • High priority open: 'priority<=2^state!=7^state!=6'

  • Incidents by group: 'assignment_group.name=Network Operations'

  • Recent (last 7 days): 'opened_at>=javascript:gs.beginningOfLast7Days()'

Returns: List of incidents with state, priority, assignment, and timestamps

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of results to return (1–100, default 20)
queryNoEncoded ServiceNow query (default: non-closed)state!=7^state!=6
offsetNoNumber of results to skip for pagination (default 0)
response_formatNoOutput format: 'markdown' (default) for human-readable or 'json' for structured datamarkdown
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context: query syntax, default behavior (empty = all open incidents), supported response formats (markdown/json), and return fields (state, priority, assignment, timestamps). This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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?

The description is well-structured with clear sections for args, common query examples, and return value. It is somewhat lengthy but every line adds useful information given the complexity of ServiceNow query syntax. It is front-loaded with the purpose statement, making the tool's role immediately clear.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (query language, pagination, output formats) and lack of an output schema, the description covers the essential operational details: query construction, defaults, limit/offset behavior, response format selection, and the fields returned. It does not cover error handling or authentication, but for a read-only, well-annotated list tool, this is sufficient.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds significant meaning beyond the schema, especially for the 'query' parameter, with concrete examples of encoded queries (e.g., 'priority<=2^state!=7^state!=6') and clarification that empty means all open incidents. This extra guidance helps the agent construct valid queries, exceeding mere schema repetition.

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 opens with 'List and search ServiceNow incidents with filters,' using a specific verb ('list and search') and resource ('ServiceNow incidents'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like get_incident (single incident) and query_records (generic table query) by focusing on incident listing and providing incident-specific query examples.

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 context for when to use the tool: for listing/searching incidents with filters. It includes common query examples and notes that empty query returns all open incidents. However, it does not explicitly state alternatives or exclusions (e.g., 'use servicenow_get_incident for a single record'), so it misses the top-tier criteria for explicit when/when-not guidance.

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