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

now-sdk-ext-mcp

by sonisoft-cnanda
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Publish Knowledge Article

publish_kb_article
Idempotent

Publish a draft knowledge article by changing its workflow state to 'published', making it accessible to end users.

Instructions

Publish a draft knowledge article by setting its workflow_state to 'published'. This makes the article visible to end users who have access to the knowledge base.

IMPORTANT: This makes the article publicly visible. Ensure the content has been reviewed before publishing.

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": {
      "sys_id": "<sys_id>"
    },
    "name": "publish_kb_article"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sys_idYesThe sys_id of the article to publish.
instanceNoThe ServiceNow instance auth alias to use. This is the alias configured via `now-sdk auth --add` (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.

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?

The description adds important behavioral context beyond the annotations: it makes the article publicly visible and warns to ensure review before publishing. The annotations already signal mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructiveness (destructiveHint=false), but the description enriches with visibility impact.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main action, followed by a relevant warning. No redundancy or fluff. The IMPORTANT note earns its place.

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 simple tool with two params and no output schema, the description is complete. It explains what happens (visible to end users) and includes a safety warning. It doesn't discuss return values or error cases, but these are not critical for this operation.

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 description coverage is 100%, but the description adds semantic meaning by stating the sys_id must be for a 'draft' article. This is a meaningful constraint not explicitly in the schema. The instance parameter is well covered by the schema description already.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Publish a draft knowledge article by setting its workflow_state to published.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_kb_article, update_kb_article, and get_kb_article.

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 context is clear: this tool is for publishing draft articles and making them visible. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, but the 'IMPORTANT' note about review before publishing gives practical guidance. This is one step below explicit when/when-not/alternatives.

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