Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
now-sdk-ext-mcp

now-sdk-ext-mcp

by sonisoft-cnanda
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Move Update Set Records

move_update_set_records
DestructiveIdempotent

Move selected or all records from a source update set into a target update set by sys_id, then query sys_update_xml to confirm the result.

Instructions

Move records from one update set to another, by sys_id or all records of a source set.

WARNING: this is unverified: any HTTP 200 counts as moved, nothing is read back, and it does not check the same-application rule, newer captures elsewhere, or duplicates in the target. Prefer move_update_set_capture, which checks all of those and reads the move back; if you use this, query sys_update_xml afterwards.

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": {
      "target_update_set_id": "<target_update_set_id>"
    },
    "name": "move_update_set_records"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
instanceNoThe ServiceNow instance auth alias to connect to. This is the alias configured via `snc configure` (e.g., "myinstance", "prod", "test"). The user will typically refer to this by name when saying things like "on my myinstance instance". If not provided, falls back to the SN_AUTH_ALIAS environment variable.
record_sys_idsNoSpecific sys_ids of sys_update_xml records to move. If omitted and source_update_set is provided, moves all records from the source.
source_update_setNoThe sys_id of the source update set to move all records FROM. Used when record_sys_ids is not specified.
target_update_set_idYesThe sys_id of the update set to move records TO.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.5.1

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description goes well past them: verification is absent, any HTTP 200 counts as moved, and same-application, newer-capture, and duplicate rules are unchecked. That is unusually candid for a mutation tool. It stops short of the full 5 only because it does not describe failure modes (what happens on partial moves) or the response shape.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler. The capability statement comes first and the warning follows immediately, so the hazard is visible before the agent commits to the call. Every clause carries distinct information.

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 destructive mutation with no output schema, the description supplies the missing verification picture and a concrete remediation step (query sys_update_xml). It is nearly complete; the only gap is how partial or failed moves manifest, which an agent would otherwise have to discover at runtime.

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 schema already defines instance, record_sys_ids, source_update_set, and target_update_set_id in detail. The description restates the record_sys_ids vs. source_update_set selection mode but adds no syntax, precedence, or conflict-handling detail beyond the schema. 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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Move records from one update set to another") plus the two selection modes (by sys_id or all records of a source set). It also implicitly separates itself from move_update_set_capture, which is named in the warning, so an agent can place this tool precisely among the update-set siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly names the preferred alternative (move_update_set_capture) and the condition that selects it, listing the checks that tool performs. It also gives an explicit follow-up action ("query sys_update_xml afterwards"), which is exactly the when-to-use/when-not guidance an agent needs.

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