Skip to main content
Glama
vparlapalli490

ServiceNow MCP Server

add_change_task

Add tasks to ServiceNow change requests to track work items, assign responsibilities, and schedule activities within change management workflows.

Instructions

Add a task to a change request

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
change_idYesChange request ID or sys_id
short_descriptionYesShort description of the task
descriptionNoDetailed description of the task
assigned_toNoUser assigned to the task
planned_start_dateNoPlanned start date (YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS)
planned_end_dateNoPlanned end date (YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS)

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function that implements the add_change_task tool logic. It validates input parameters using AddChangeTaskParams, prepares the data, and makes a POST request to the ServiceNow API to create a new change task.
    def add_change_task(
        auth_manager: AuthManager,
        server_config: ServerConfig,
        params: Dict[str, Any],
    ) -> Dict[str, Any]:
        """
        Add a task to a change request in ServiceNow.
    
        Args:
            auth_manager: The authentication manager.
            server_config: The server configuration.
            params: The parameters for adding a change task.
    
        Returns:
            The created change task.
        """
        # Unwrap and validate parameters
        result = _unwrap_and_validate_params(
            params, 
            AddChangeTaskParams,
            required_fields=["change_id", "short_description"]
        )
        
        if not result["success"]:
            return result
        
        validated_params = result["params"]
        
        # Prepare the request data
        data = {
            "change_request": validated_params.change_id,
            "short_description": validated_params.short_description,
        }
        
        # Add optional fields if provided
        if validated_params.description:
            data["description"] = validated_params.description
        if validated_params.assigned_to:
            data["assigned_to"] = validated_params.assigned_to
        if validated_params.planned_start_date:
            data["planned_start_date"] = validated_params.planned_start_date
        if validated_params.planned_end_date:
            data["planned_end_date"] = validated_params.planned_end_date
        
        # Get the instance URL
        instance_url = _get_instance_url(auth_manager, server_config)
        if not instance_url:
            return {
                "success": False,
                "message": "Cannot find instance_url in either server_config or auth_manager",
            }
        
        # Get the headers
        headers = _get_headers(auth_manager, server_config)
        if not headers:
            return {
                "success": False,
                "message": "Cannot find get_headers method in either auth_manager or server_config",
            }
        
        # Add Content-Type header
        headers["Content-Type"] = "application/json"
        
        # Make the API request
        url = f"{instance_url}/api/now/table/change_task"
        
        try:
            response = requests.post(url, json=data, headers=headers)
            response.raise_for_status()
            
            result = response.json()
            
            return {
                "success": True,
                "message": "Change task added successfully",
                "change_task": result["result"],
            }
        except requests.exceptions.RequestException as e:
            logger.error(f"Error adding change task: {e}")
            return {
                "success": False,
                "message": f"Error adding change task: {str(e)}",
            }
  • Pydantic BaseModel defining the input schema/validation for the add_change_task tool parameters.
    class AddChangeTaskParams(BaseModel):
        """Parameters for adding a task to a change request."""
    
        change_id: str = Field(..., description="Change request ID or sys_id")
        short_description: str = Field(..., description="Short description of the task")
        description: Optional[str] = Field(None, description="Detailed description of the task")
        assigned_to: Optional[str] = Field(None, description="User assigned to the task")
        planned_start_date: Optional[str] = Field(None, description="Planned start date (YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS)")
        planned_end_date: Optional[str] = Field(None, description="Planned end date (YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS)")
  • Registration of the 'add_change_task' tool in the central get_tool_definitions() function's dictionary. Maps the tool name to its handler function (aliased), params schema, return type hint, description, and serialization method.
    "add_change_task": (
        add_change_task_tool,
        AddChangeTaskParams,
        str,  # Expects JSON string
        "Add a task to a change request",
        "json_dict",  # Tool returns Pydantic model
    ),
  • Re-export/import of the add_change_task function from change_tools.py in the tools package __init__.py, making it available at the package level.
    from servicenow_mcp.tools.change_tools import (
        add_change_task,
        approve_change,
        create_change_request,
        get_change_request_details,
        list_change_requests,
        reject_change,
        submit_change_for_approval,
        update_change_request,
    )
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure but provides minimal information. It states this is an 'add' operation (implying creation/mutation) but doesn't mention permissions required, whether this triggers notifications or workflows, what happens on success/failure, or any rate limits. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is inadequate.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a straightforward tool and front-loads the essential information immediately.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what happens after adding the task (success indicators, return values, error conditions), doesn't mention prerequisites or permissions, and provides no behavioral context. The 100% schema coverage helps with parameters but doesn't compensate for the overall behavioral gap.

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 documents all 6 parameters thoroughly. The description adds no parameter information beyond what's in the schema, providing zero additional semantic context about parameters like 'change_id' or 'short_description'. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does all the work.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Add a task') and target resource ('to a change request'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'add_workflow_activity' or 'add_comment' that also add items to other entities, missing explicit sibling differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools available (like 'add_workflow_activity' or 'add_comment'), there's no indication of when this specific task-adding operation is appropriate versus other addition operations in the system.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/vparlapalli490/MCP'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server