Skip to main content
Glama
tedorigawa001

ServiceNow-MCP

by tedorigawa001
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Related Servers

Alternatives to ServiceNow-MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • snow-mcp

      ShunyaAI
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A comprehensive MCP server for ServiceNow that provides over 60 pre-built tools for ITSM, ITOM, and App Dev operations, enabling AI agents to manage incidents, changes, users, service catalog, and projects through a unified interface.
      6
      MIT

    • servicenow-platform-mcp

      Xerrion
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to interact with ServiceNow through MCP, providing schema inspection, record CRUD, attachments, audit, Flow Designer, and platform investigations with policy-guarded access.
      15
      1,918 PyPI
      4
      MIT

    • ServiceNow MCP Server

      Deepakj22
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI assistants and development tools to interact with ServiceNow instances through the Model Context Protocol, supporting incident, change, problem, CMDB, service catalog, knowledge base, and custom table operations.
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

    TDQS

    B3/5.0

    Scored across 503 tools

    Disambiguation2/5

    The set contains many overlapping access patterns: query_records, smart_query, natural_language_search, nlq_query, ai_search, and search_knowledge all retrieve data through subtly different mechanisms. There are also multiple dashboard, property-management, update-set, and mobile tools whose boundaries require careful reading to distinguish. Individual descriptions are often detailed, but at 503 tools the risk of misselection across similar resources and actions is high.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Most tool names follow a readable snake_case verb_noun convention (e.g. create_incident, list_users, update_problem, get_hr_case). There are deviations such as query_records, describe_table, find_artifact, smart_query, and domain-prefixed ml_* tools, but they remain understandable rather than chaotic. The naming is mostly predictable despite the enormous surface.

    Tool Count1/5

    503 tools is an extreme mismatch for a coherent MCP server surface and far beyond the recommended 3-15 tool range. Even with broad ServiceNow coverage, this volume makes discovery, selection, and maintenance impractical for an agent. The server appears to expose nearly every platform operation rather than a curated, well-scoped toolkit.

    Completeness3/5

    Coverage spans many ServiceNow domains—ITSM, HR, CSM, GRC, security, CMDB, reporting, integrations, platform metadata, and more—so many core workflows are represented. However, coverage is uneven: several tools are explicitly unsupported stubs, delete operations are sparse outside a few areas, and some modules have rich read surfaces but limited lifecycle coverage. It is extensive but not a complete, clean lifecycle surface for the stated broad purpose.

    Maintenance

    ActivityActive
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources