Reference design: ServiceNow or Jira at the centre, rConfig evidence on every ticket
In organisations where every change and incident lives in an ITSM tool, the most useful AI isn’t a chat window. It’s evidence that appears on the ticket: what changed, whether it matched the plan, which devices are involved. In this design an agent sits between rConfig and ServiceNow or Jira, and its output lands where change managers and incident leads already look.
What it looks like
flowchart LR
RC["rConfig"] -- "webhooks:<br/>config.changed,<br/>compliance.device_failed" --> N["n8n / service"]
N --> A["AI agent"]
A -- "MCP, read-only" --> RC
A -- "MCP: read tickets,<br/>add notes" --> T["ServiceNow / Jira"]
E["Change manager,<br/>incident lead"] --> T
| Flow | Trigger | Ticket gets |
|---|---|---|
| Change verification | Change window closes | Matched, missing and unplanned lines per device. See change window verification |
| Change narration | config.changed webhook |
A plain-English summary, linked to an open change if one matches. See event-driven narration |
| Compliance drift | compliance.device_failed webhook |
Which policy started failing, the reason, and the config lines behind it |
| Incident enrichment | Incident created for a device | Recent config changes and current compliance for the affected devices |
Write boundaries
The design depends on keeping writes small and visible.
- rConfig: read-only, always. The MCP server has no write tools.
- ITSM: the agent’s identity may add notes or comments. It may not approve, close, reassign or reschedule.
- Everything the agent writes is labelled as generated, so reviewers know what they’re reading.
Identities
| Tool | Identity | Rights |
|---|---|---|
| rConfig | Service user with a scoped role | MCP read (devices in scope only) |
| ServiceNow / Jira | Integration user | Read changes and incidents, add work notes or comments |
| n8n or service | Holds both credentials in its secret store | None of its own |
Related reference
Frequently asked questions
How does rConfig connect to ServiceNow or Jira with AI?
Through an AI agent connected to both over MCP, or through rConfig webhooks into an n8n workflow. The agent reads tickets, gets config history and diffs from rConfig, and writes its findings back as ticket notes.
What may the agent write in the ITSM tool?
Keep it to notes or comments on existing tickets. Approving, closing and rescheduling changes should stay with people.
Do we need an agent for this, or are webhooks enough?
rConfig webhooks can open or update tickets on their own. The agent adds explanation: what a change does, whether it matches the plan, which devices an incident touches.