Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ServiceNow Incident MCP Server

ServiceNow Incident MCP Server

by mdasiff
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Close Incident

close_incident

Resolve and close an incident by providing close notes and an optional close code, setting its state to Closed.

Instructions

Resolve and close an incident with the given close notes (and optional close code). Sets state to Closed.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "incidentNumber": "<incidentNumber>",
      "closeNotes": "<closeNotes>"
    },
    "name": "close_incident"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
incidentNumberYesServiceNow incident number, e.g. "INC0012345"
closeNotesYes
closeCodeNoClose code (default "Solved (Permanently)")

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states 'Sets state to Closed' but lacks details on destructive nature, permissions, or whether resolution requires prerequisites. A minimal disclosure for a mutation operation.

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 with subject, verb, and key details. No redundant words; front-loaded purpose.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple 3-param operation without output schema, the description is adequate but minimal. Given no annotations, more context on behavior (e.g., irreversible, required permissions) would improve completeness.

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 67% of parameters (incidentNumber and closeCode have descriptions). The description merely restates parameter names without adding format, constraints, or default values. closeNotes lacks schema description and description adds no extra meaning.

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?

Clearly states verb and resource: 'Resolve and close an incident'. Distinguishes from siblings like 'update_incident' by specifying the end state 'Closed'.

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?

Implicitly indicates when to use (to close an incident) but no explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives beyond the context. For example, it doesn't mention using 'update_incident' for non-closing changes.

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