swsd-mcp

swsd_create_service_request

Create a service request incident in SolarWinds Service Desk by submitting a catalog request with form variables and custom field values.

Instructions

Submit a SWSD catalog request, creating an incident with is_service_request: true (auto-set by SWSD on this endpoint) and the supplied form variable values. Use swsd_list_catalog_items to find the right catalog_item_id and swsd_get_catalog_item to inspect its variables before filling. Each request_variables entry needs custom_field_id (= the catalog item variable's id) and value (stringified to match the variable's kind — for dropdowns, one of the options choices). The created incident's id is returned for follow-up calls (swsd_get_incident, swsd_assign_incident, etc.). WRITE — does not retry on transient failure; the agent should verify with swsd_get_incident before retrying. To set tenant-specific custom field values, pass custom_fields: [{name, value}] — call swsd_describe_custom_fields first to discover field names and (for Dropdowns) allowed values. Validated for Text, Dropdown, Number, Checkbox, and Date types.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`description`	No	Optional free-text description added to the resulting incident. The catalog item's default description from the SWSD UI is replaced if you pass this.
`custom_fields`	No	Set tenant-specific custom field values on the record. Multi_picklist and User-type fields are not yet supported by this tool (set those via the SWSD UI). Validated for Text, Dropdown, Number, Checkbox, and Date types.
`catalog_item_id`	Yes	Catalog item id from `swsd_list_catalog_items` or `swsd_get_catalog_item`. The endpoint URL embeds this; SWSD auto-populates the resulting incident's name, category, and subcategory from the catalog item.
`requester_email`	No	Email of the user the request is for. Defaults to the authenticated user (resolved from the JWT). SWSD rejects numeric requester ids on this endpoint, so pass an email if you need to file the request on behalf of someone else.
`request_variables`	No	Form variable values, one entry per catalog variable being filled. Use `swsd_get_catalog_item` first to discover the available variables and required ones (`required: "1"`).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`incident`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed7 schema fields changedv2.3.1Aug 22, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / custom_fields / items / properties / name / maxLength
```
Added value: +500
```
- changedInput schema / properties / custom_fields / items / properties / value / anyOf
```
Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "number"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "boolean"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "maxLength": 100000,
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "boolean"
+  }
+]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / custom_fields / maxItems
```
Added value: +100
```
- addedInput schema / properties / description / maxLength
```
Added value: +100000
```
- addedInput schema / properties / request_variables / items / properties / value / maxLength
```
Added value: +100000
```
- addedInput schema / properties / request_variables / maxItems
```
Added value: +100
```
- addedInput schema / properties / requester_email / maxLength
```
Added value: +320
```
First observedv2.1.0May 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations: it discloses that this is a WRITE operation that 'does not retry on transient failure', mandates verification via swsd_get_incident before retrying, and notes the auto-set `is_service_request: true` behavior and supported value types. This is exactly the kind of operational context (non-idempotency, verification protocol) that idempotentHint=false only hints at. No contradiction with annotations — 'WRITE' aligns with readOnlyHint=false and the retry caution aligns with idempotentHint=false.

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 dense (roughly 180 words) but well-ordered: purpose first, then prerequisite workflow, then parameter semantics, then the WRITE/retry warning, then the custom_fields note, then validation scope. Each sentence earns its place with a distinct fact. Minor redundancy exists — the validation note ('Validated for Text, Dropdown, Number, Checkbox, and Date types') also appears in the schema's custom_fields description — so it is not maximally lean, but it is well structured.

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?

For a non-idempotent write tool with 5 parameters and prerequisite discovery calls, the description covers purpose, workflow prerequisites, parameter relationships, retry/verification behavior, and type validation, and the output schema handles return-value documentation. What is missing is an explicit pointer to the generic sibling swsd_create_incident for non-catalog cases and any error-behavior detail (e.g., failure modes for invalid dropdown values). Highly actionable, but not exhaustive.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds cross-parameter context — request_variables' custom_field_id equals the catalog item variable's id and values must be stringified to match the variable's kind — but the schema already documents these relationships in detail (e.g., 'Get it from swsd_get_catalog_item -> item.variables[*].id'). The description reinforces but does not materially extend the schema's parameter documentation.

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 a specific verb-resource pair — 'Submit a SWSD catalog request, creating an incident' — and adds the distinguishing flag `is_service_request: true (auto-set by SWSD on this endpoint)`, which differentiates it from the sibling swsd_create_incident. An agent can tell exactly what this tool does and how it differs from its nearest sibling without opening the schema.

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 gives an explicit prerequisite workflow: use swsd_list_catalog_items to find catalog_item_id, swsd_get_catalog_item to inspect variables, and swsd_describe_custom_fields before setting custom_fields. It also prescribes the post-call verification step ('verify with swsd_get_incident before retrying'). The only gap is that it never explicitly says when NOT to use this tool in favor of swsd_create_incident for non-catalog incidents.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server