change-management
Skill41 starsChanged 20 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Complete change lifecycle management including RFC creation, CAB preparation, approval workflows, implementation coordination, and post-implementation review
14 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- darkweb19/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- aymardkouakou/claude-gh-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- anotb/management-consulting-plugintheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- peterbamuhigire/proposal-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 17, 2026
- edu6565/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 11, 2026
- JohnnyQ-commits/aqueduct-data-agenttheir own version, first seen Oct 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use andreessen, business-investment-advisor and 10 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
Hussain-ElfalahSkillandreessen
Also in 4 projects that use this
Hussain-ElfalahSkillbusiness-investment-advisor
Also in 4 projects that use this
csiddhant796-blipSkillkarpathy-coder
Use when writing, reviewing, or committing code to enforce Karpathy's 4 coding principles — surface assumptions before coding, keep it simple, make surgical changes, define verifiable goals. Triggers on "review my diff", "check complexity", "am I overcomplicating this", "karpathy check", "before I commit", or any code quality concern where the LLM might be overcoding.
Also in 4 projects that use this
csiddhant796-blipSkillself-eval
Honestly evaluate AI work quality using a two-axis scoring system. Use after completing a task, code review, or work session to get an unbiased assessment. Detects score inflation, forces devil's advocate reasoning, and persists scores across sessions.
Also in 4 projects that use this
- +8 more from Hussain-Elfalah
Other versions14 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 14
- anotb/management-consulting-plugin★ 62same name
- abinauv/business-consulting★ 28same name
- Hassaan146/claude-skills★ 18same name
- 10Legs/ceo-f500-harness★ 8same name
- peterbamuhigire/proposal-skills★ 8same name
- Hussain-Elfalah/Agentic-Skills★ 2same name
- JohnnyQ-commits/aqueduct-data-agent★ 2same name
- aymardkouakou/claude-gh-skills★ 1same name
- mahiunfiltered/claude-code-skills★ 1same name
- poorvith-mp/skills-business★ 1same name
4 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository184 other files it gives its agents.
- happy-platform-skillsSkill
- application-scopeSkill
- batch-operationsSkill
- configuration-validationSkill
- deployment-workflowSkill
- generic-crud-operationsSkill
- instance-managementSkill
- schema-discoverySkill
- script-executionSkill
- script-syncSkill
- smart-assessmentSkill
- task-analysisSkill
- task-summarizationSkill
- update-set-managementSkill
- user-provisioningSkill
- workflow-creationSkill
- workspace-insightsSkill
- approval-summarizationSkill
- approval-workflowsSkill
- catalog-builder-aiSkill
- catalog-item-generationSkill
- item-creationSkill
- multi-turn-orderingSkill
- request-fulfillmentSkill
- ui-policiesSkill
- variable-managementSkill
- ci-discoverySkill
- cmdb-search-analysisSkill
- data-qualitySkill
- impact-analysisSkill
- relationship-mappingSkill
- service-graph-diagnosisSkill
- activity-responseSkill
- csm-case-summarizationSkill
- chat-recommendationSkill
- email-recommendationSkill
- csm-kb-generationSkill
- resolution-notesSkill
- csm-sentiment-analysisSkill
- csm-sidebar-summarizationSkill
- csm-suggested-stepsSkill
- trending-topicsSkill
- automated-testingSkill
- business-rulesSkill
- client-scriptsSkill
- code-assistSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- data-importSkill
- debugging-techniquesSkill
- fluent-sdkSkill
- glide-api-referenceSkill
- mcp-server-installationSkill
- mcp-serverSkill
- notificationsSkill
- performance-optimizationSkill
- scheduled-jobsSkill
- scripted-rest-apisSkill
- script-includesSkill
- servicenow-docs-mcpSkill
- test-generationSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
6 rules. 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 11 edited versions we read keep these.
6
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 38
Ensure proper authorization and documentation
- Distinctive: line 50
Access: Read/write to change_request, change_task tables
- Distinctive: line 856
Right-Size the Change: Don't combine unrelated changes
- Distinctive: line 857
Test in Lower Environments: Always test before production
- Distinctive: line 863
ITIL Alignment: Follow the Change Enablement practice
- Distinctive: line 870
Solution: Verify all mandatory fields completed.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 11 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Change Management Lifecycle
Overview
This skill provides end-to-end guidance for managing changes in ServiceNow following ITIL best practices. It covers the complete lifecycle from Request for Change (RFC) creation through Post-Implementation Review (PIR).
Change Management Goals:
- Minimize risk of service disruption
- Ensure proper authorization and documentation
- Enable controlled implementation of changes
- Facilitate continuous improvement through PIR
Change Types Covered:
- Normal: Standard approval workflow, CAB review
- Standard: Pre-approved, low-risk, repeatable changes
- Emergency: Expedited process for urgent fixes
Prerequisites
- Roles:
itil,change_manager, orcab_member - Access: Read/write to change_request, change_task tables
- Knowledge: Change management process, CAB procedures
- Related Skills:
itsm/problem-analysis(for fix implementation)
Procedure
Phase 1: RFC Creation
Step 1.1: Create Normal Change Request
Using MCP:
Tool: SN-Create-Record
Parameters:
table_name: change_request
data:
short_description: "[Action] [CI/Service] - [Brief purpose]"
description: |
CHANGE OVERVIEW:
[Detailed description of what will be changed]
BUSINESS JUSTIFICATION:
[Why this change is needed]
SCOPE:
- In Scope: [What is included]
- Out of Scope: [What is explicitly excluded]
AFFECTED SERVICES/CIS:
- [Service/CI 1]
- [Service/CI 2]
DEPENDENCIES:
- [Dependency 1]
- [Dependency 2]
type: normal
category: [Hardware/Software/Network/Other]
priority: 3
risk: moderate
impact: 2
assignment_group: [implementation_team_sys_id]
cmdb_ci: [affected_ci_sys_id]
requested_by: [requester_sys_id]
start_date: [planned_start]
end_date: [planned_end]Using REST API:
POST /api/now/table/change_request
Content-Type: application/json
{
"short_description": "Upgrade Database Server - Production CRM",
"description": "CHANGE OVERVIEW:\nUpgrade Oracle database from 19c to 21c...",
"type": "normal",
"category": "Software",
"priority": "3",
"risk": "moderate",
"impact": "2",
"assignment_group": "group_sys_id",
"cmdb_ci": "ci_sys_id",
"start_date": "2024-02-15 22:00:00",
"end_date": "2024-02-16 02:00:00"
}Step 1.2: Create Standard Change Request
First, find approved standard change template:
Tool: SN-Query-Table
Parameters:
table_name: std_change_catalog
query: active=true^namLIKE[keyword]
fields: sys_id,name,short_description,template
limit: 10Create from template:
Tool: SN-Create-Record
Parameters:
table_name: change_request
data:
short_description: "[Standard change description]"
description: |
STANDARD CHANGE EXECUTION:
Template: [Template name]
SPECIFIC DETAILS FOR THIS INSTANCE:
- Target System: [system]
- Scheduled Date: [date]
- Requestor: [name]
type: standard
std_change_producer_version: [template_sys_id]
category: [from template]
assignment_group: [implementation_team]
cmdb_ci: [target_ci]
start_date: [planned_start]
end_date: [planned_end]Step 1.3: Create Emergency Change Request
Emergency changes bypass normal CAB but still require documentation:
Tool: SN-Create-Record
Parameters:
table_name: change_request
data:
short_description: "[EMERGENCY] [Brief description of urgent fix]"
description: |
=== EMERGENCY CHANGE REQUEST ===
EMERGENCY JUSTIFICATION:
[Why this cannot wait for normal change process]
INCIDENT REFERENCE:
[Related incident number if applicable]
IMMEDIATE RISK IF NOT IMPLEMENTED:
- [Risk 1]
- [Risk 2]
PROPOSED CHANGE:
[What will be done]
MINIMAL TESTING PERFORMED:
[Testing done given time constraints]
VERBAL APPROVAL:
- Approved by: [name]
- Time: [timestamp]
- Method: [phone/in-person]
type: emergency
category: [category]
priority: 1
risk: high
impact: 1
assignment_group: [implementation_team]
cmdb_ci: [affected_ci]
reason: |
EMERGENCY REASON:
[Detailed reason for emergency classification]
start_date: [immediate]
end_date: [expected_completion]Phase 2: Change Documentation
Step 2.1: Implementation Plan
Add detailed implementation plan:
Tool: SN-Update-Record
Parameters:
table_name: change_request
sys_id: [change_sys_id]
data:
implementation_plan: |
=== IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ===
PRE-IMPLEMENTATION:
Time: [start] - [time]
1. [ ] Notify stakeholders of maintenance window
Responsible: [name]
2. [ ] Verify backup completion
Responsible: [name]
3. [ ] Confirm rollback resources available
Responsible: [name]
4. [ ] Place system in maintenance mode
Responsible: [name]
IMPLEMENTATION:
Time: [time] - [time]
5. [ ] [Step 5 description]
Command/Action: [specific command or action]
Expected Duration: [X minutes]
Success Criteria: [how to verify]
6. [ ] [Step 6 description]
Command/Action: [specific command or action]
Expected Duration: [X minutes]
Success Criteria: [how to verify]
7. [ ] [Step 7 description]
Command/Action: [specific command or action]
Expected Duration: [X minutes]
Success Criteria: [how to verify]
VERIFICATION:
Time: [time] - [time]
8. [ ] Run verification tests
Test Script: [location]
Expected Results: [description]
9. [ ] Confirm user access
Test Users: [list]
10. [ ] Monitor system for 30 minutes
Metrics to watch: [list]
POST-IMPLEMENTATION:
Time: [time] - [end]
11. [ ] Remove maintenance mode
12. [ ] Send completion notification
13. [ ] Update documentationStep 2.2: Backout/Rollback Plan
Tool: SN-Update-Record
Parameters:
table_name: change_request
sys_id: [change_sys_id]
data:
backout_plan: |
=== BACKOUT/ROLLBACK PLAN ===
ROLLBACK DECISION CRITERIA:
Initiate rollback if ANY of the following occur:
- [ ] Implementation step fails and cannot be resolved in [X] minutes
- [ ] Verification tests fail
- [ ] Service degradation exceeds [threshold]
- [ ] Unexpected errors in logs
- [ ] [Other criteria]
ROLLBACK POINT OF NO RETURN:
After step [X], rollback becomes significantly more complex.
Decision to proceed or rollback must be made by: [time]
ROLLBACK PROCEDURE:
Estimated Duration: [X minutes]
1. [ ] Stop current implementation
Action: [specific action]
2. [ ] Restore from backup
Backup Location: [location]
Restore Command: [command]
Expected Duration: [X minutes]
3. [ ] Verify service restoration
Test: [test procedure]
4. [ ] Remove maintenance mode
5. [ ] Notify stakeholders of rollback
Communication: [template/channel]
ROLLBACK VERIFICATION:
- [ ] Service accessible
- [ ] User authentication working
- [ ] Core functions verified
- [ ] No data loss confirmed
POST-ROLLBACK:
- Document reason for rollback
- Create problem ticket if root cause unknown
- Schedule re-attempt after analysisStep 2.3: Test Plan
Tool: SN-Update-Record
Parameters:
table_name: change_request
sys_id: [change_sys_id]
data:
test_plan: |
=== TEST PLAN ===
PRE-CHANGE BASELINE:
Capture current state for comparison
- [ ] System performance metrics: [specific metrics]
- [ ] Current version info: [how to capture]
- [ ] User count/active sessions: [query/tool]
SMOKE TESTS:
Quick tests to verify basic functionality
| Test | Action | Expected Result | Pass/Fail |
|------|--------|-----------------|-----------|
| Login | Admin login | Dashboard loads | |
| Core Function | [action] | [expected] | |
| API | [endpoint] | 200 OK | |
| Database | [query] | [expected] | |
FUNCTIONAL TESTS:
Detailed functionality verification
| Test ID | Test Case | Steps | Expected | Actual | Pass/Fail |
|---------|-----------|-------|----------|--------|-----------|
| FT-001 | [name] | [steps] | [expected] | | |
| FT-002 | [name] | [steps] | [expected] | | |
| FT-003 | [name] | [steps] | [expected] | | |
PERFORMANCE TESTS:
Compare against baseline
| Metric | Baseline | Post-Change | Threshold | Pass/Fail |
|--------|----------|-------------|-----------|-----------|
| Response Time | [X]ms | | <[Y]ms | |
| CPU Usage | [X]% | | <[Y]% | |
| Memory | [X]GB | | <[Y]GB | |
USER ACCEPTANCE:
- Test User: [name]
- Test Scenario: [description]
- Sign-off Required: Yes/NoPhase 3: CAB Preparation and Scheduling
Step 3.1: Schedule for CAB Review
Update change for CAB:
Tool: SN-Update-Record
Parameters:
table_name: change_request
sys_id: [change_sys_id]
data:
state: -4 # Assess
cab_required: true
cab_date: [cab_meeting_date]
work_notes: |
=== CAB SUBMISSION ===
Submitted for CAB Review: [date]
Target CAB Meeting: [date/time]
CAB Preparation Checklist:
- [x] Implementation plan complete
- [x] Backout plan complete
- [x] Test plan complete
- [x] Risk assessment complete
- [x] Stakeholders identified
- [x] Communication plan ready
Additional Materials:
- [Link to supporting documentation]
- [Architecture diagram reference]Step 3.2: Create CAB Presentation Summary
Tool: SN-Add-Work-Notes
Parameters:
sys_id: [change_sys_id]
work_notes: |
=== CAB PRESENTATION SUMMARY ===
CHANGE: [CHG#]
TITLE: [Short description]
REQUESTOR: [Name/Team]
WHAT:
[One paragraph summary of the change]
WHY:
[Business justification in 2-3 sentences]
WHEN:
- Proposed Start: [date/time]
- Proposed End: [date/time]
- Duration: [X hours]
- Maintenance Window: [Yes/No - description]
WHO IS AFFECTED:
- Users: [groups/count]
- Services: [list]
- Regions: [if applicable]
RISK ASSESSMENT:
- Risk Level: [Low/Moderate/High]
- Impact if Fails: [description]
- Likelihood of Failure: [Low/Medium/High]
MITIGATION:
- [Key mitigation 1]
- [Key mitigation 2]
ROLLBACK:
- Rollback possible: [Yes/No]
- Rollback time: [X minutes/hours]
- Point of no return: [time/step]
DEPENDENCIES:
- [Other changes/freezes/events]
APPROVAL REQUESTED:
[Standard/Expedited approval request]Step 3.3: Query Scheduled CAB Changes
Find all changes scheduled for CAB:
Tool: SN-Query-Table
Parameters:
table_name: change_request
query: cab_required=true^cab_date>=javascript:gs.beginningOfToday()^cab_dateONThis week@javascript:gs.beginningOfThisWeek()@javascript:gs.endOfThisWeek()^state=-4
fields: number,short_description,cab_date,requested_by,assignment_group,risk,priority
order_by: cab_datePhase 4: Change Approval
Step 4.1: Check Approval Status
Tool: SN-Query-Table
Parameters:
table_name: sysapproval_approver
query: document_id=[change_sys_id]
fields: sys_id,approver,state,comments,sys_updated_onStep 4.2: Approve Change (as Approver)
Using MCP:
Tool: SN-Approve-Change
Parameters:
sys_id: [change_sys_id]
approval_state: approved
comments: |
Approved based on:
- Risk assessment reviewed and acceptable
- Implementation plan verified complete
- Rollback plan adequate
- Testing plan comprehensive
- Change window appropriate
Conditions:
- [Any conditions for approval]Using REST API:
PATCH /api/now/table/sysapproval_approver/{approver_sys_id}
Content-Type: application/json
{
"state": "approved",
"comments": "Approved based on:\n- Risk assessment reviewed..."
}Reject Change:
Tool: SN-Approve-Change
Parameters:
sys_id: [change_sys_id]
approval_state: rejected
comments: |
Change rejected for the following reasons:
1. [Reason 1]
2. [Reason 2]
Required remediation before resubmission:
- [Action 1]
- [Action 2]
Please address these concerns and resubmit.Step 4.3: Move to Scheduled State
After approval:
Tool: SN-Update-Record
Parameters:
table_name: change_request
sys_id: [change_sys_id]
data:
state: -1 # Scheduled
work_notes: |
=== CHANGE APPROVED AND SCHEDULED ===
Approval Received: [date]
Approved By: [names]
Implementation Window:
Start: [date/time]
End: [date/time]
Pre-Implementation Meeting: [date/time if scheduled]
Go/No-Go Decision Time: [time before start]Phase 5: Implementation
Step 5.1: Create Implementation Tasks
Using MCP:
Tool: SN-Create-Record
Parameters:
table_name: change_task
data:
parent: [change_sys_id]
change_task_type: planning
short_description: "Pre-Implementation: [Task description]"
description: |
PRE-IMPLEMENTATION TASK
Objective: [What needs to be done]
Steps:
1. [Step 1]
2. [Step 2]
Deliverables:
- [Deliverable 1]
Completion Criteria:
- [How to know it's done]
assignment_group: [team]
assigned_to: [person]
planned_start_date: [start]
planned_end_date: [end]Standard task types:
planning- Pre-implementation preparationimplementation- Actual change executiontesting- Verification and testingreview- Post-implementation review
Step 5.2: Begin Implementation
Update change to Implementation state:
Tool: SN-Update-Record
Parameters:
table_name: change_request
sys_id: [change_sys_id]
data:
state: -2 # Implement
work_notes: |
=== IMPLEMENTATION STARTED ===
Time: [timestamp]
Implementation Lead: [name]
Go Decision Made By: [name]
Go Criteria Met:
- [x] Backup verified
- [x] Rollback team on standby
- [x] Stakeholders notified
- [x] Maintenance mode active
Starting implementation step 1...Step 5.3: Document Implementation Progress
Tool: SN-Add-Work-Notes
Parameters:
sys_id: [change_sys_id]
work_notes: |
=== IMPLEMENTATION LOG ===
[HH:MM] - Step [X]: [Description]
Status: COMPLETE
Notes: [Any observations]
[HH:MM] - Step [X+1]: [Description]
Status: IN PROGRESS
Current Overall Status: ON TRACK / DELAYED / AT RISK
Issues Encountered:
- [Issue if any, or "None"]
Next Milestone: [Description] at [time]Step 5.4: Complete Implementation
Tool: SN-Update-Record
Parameters:
table_name: change_request
sys_id: [change_sys_id]
data:
state: 0 # Review
work_notes: |
=== IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETE ===
Completion Time: [timestamp]
IMPLEMENTATION SUMMARY:
- All steps executed successfully: [Yes/No]
- Deviations from plan: [None/Description]
- Issues encountered: [None/Description]
VERIFICATION RESULTS:
- Smoke tests: PASS/FAIL
- Functional tests: PASS/FAIL
- Performance tests: PASS/FAIL
POST-IMPLEMENTATION STATUS:
- Service operational: Yes
- Users notified: Yes
- Monitoring active: Yes
Ready for PIR: YesPhase 6: Post-Implementation Review (PIR)
Step 6.1: Schedule PIR
Tool: SN-Create-Record
Parameters:
table_name: change_task
data:
parent: [change_sys_id]
change_task_type: review
short_description: "Post-Implementation Review - [CHG#]"
description: |
POST-IMPLEMENTATION REVIEW
Meeting Details:
Date: [date]
Time: [time]
Location/Call: [details]
Required Attendees:
- Change Owner
- Implementation Team
- Technical Approvers
- Service Owner (optional)
Agenda:
1. Change summary (5 min)
2. Implementation review (10 min)
3. What went well (10 min)
4. What could improve (10 min)
5. Action items (10 min)
6. Lessons learned (5 min)
assigned_to: [change_owner]
planned_start_date: [pir_date]Step 6.2: Document PIR Results
Tool: SN-Add-Work-Notes
Parameters:
sys_id: [change_sys_id]
work_notes: |
=== POST-IMPLEMENTATION REVIEW ===
PIR Date: [date]
Attendees: [list]
CHANGE OUTCOME: [Successful/Successful with Issues/Partial/Failed/Rolled Back]
METRICS:
- Planned Duration: [X hours]
- Actual Duration: [Y hours]
- Variance: [+/- Z hours]
- User Impact: [None/Minimal/Moderate/Significant]
WHAT WENT WELL:
1. [Positive outcome 1]
2. [Positive outcome 2]
3. [Positive outcome 3]
WHAT COULD BE IMPROVED:
1. [Improvement area 1]
2. [Improvement area 2]
3. [Improvement area 3]
DEVIATIONS FROM PLAN:
- [Deviation 1 and why]
- [Deviation 2 and why]
ACTION ITEMS:
1. [Action] - Owner: [name] - Due: [date]
2. [Action] - Owner: [name] - Due: [date]
LESSONS LEARNED:
- [Lesson that should be shared]
- [Process improvement suggestion]
PIR STATUS: CompleteStep 6.3: Close Change Request
Tool: SN-Update-Record
Parameters:
table_name: change_request
sys_id: [change_sys_id]
data:
state: 3 # Closed
close_code: successful
close_notes: |
CHANGE CLOSURE SUMMARY
Change: [CHG#]
Title: [Short description]
Result: SUCCESSFUL
Implementation Date: [date]
Implementation Duration: [X hours]
Benefits Realized:
- [Benefit 1]
- [Benefit 2]
Documentation Updated:
- [ ] CMDB updated
- [ ] Knowledge base updated
- [ ] Runbooks updated
PIR Complete: Yes
PIR Date: [date]
No outstanding issues.Close Code Options:
successful- Change implemented as plannedsuccessful_issues- Implemented with minor issuesunsuccessful- Change failed or was rolled back
Change State Flow
┌────────────┐ ┌──────────┐ ┌───────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ New │───►│ Assess │───►│ Authorize │───►│ Scheduled │
│ (-5) │ │ (-4) │ │ (-3) │ │ (-1) │
└────────────┘ └──────────┘ └───────────┘ └─────┬─────┘
│
┌────────────┐ ┌──────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │
│ Closed │◄───│ Review │◄───│ Implement │◄────────┘
│ (3) │ │ (0) │ │ (-2) │
└────────────┘ └──────────┘ └───────────┘
│
└───────► Canceled (4)Risk Assessment Matrix
| Risk Level | Impact | Probability | Approval | Testing |
| Low | Minor | Unlikely | Auto/Manager | Minimal |
| Moderate | Significant | Possible | CAB | Standard |
| High | Major | Likely | CAB + Executive | Extensive |
| Critical | Severe | Probable | Board Level | Full regression |
Tool Usage Summary
MCP Tools
| Tool | Purpose | Phase |
SN-List-ChangeRequests | List changes by criteria | All |
SN-Create-Record | Create change, tasks | 1, 5, 6 |
SN-Update-Record | Update change status, plans | 2-6 |
SN-Add-Work-Notes | Document all activities | All |
SN-Add-Change-Comment | Stakeholder communication | 3, 5 |
SN-Assign-Change | Assign to teams/individuals | 1, 5 |
SN-Approve-Change | Approve/reject changes | 4 |
SN-Query-Table | Query approvals, tasks | All |
REST API Endpoints
| Endpoint | Method | Purpose |
/api/now/table/change_request | GET | List changes |
/api/now/table/change_request | POST | Create change |
/api/now/table/change_request/{sys_id} | PATCH | Update change |
/api/now/table/change_task | POST | Create tasks |
/api/now/table/sysapproval_approver | GET | Check approvals |
/api/now/table/sysapproval_approver/{sys_id} | PATCH | Approve/reject |
/api/now/table/std_change_catalog | GET | List standard changes |
Best Practices
- Plan Thoroughly: Complete implementation and rollback plans before CAB
- Right-Size the Change: Don't combine unrelated changes
- Test in Lower Environments: Always test before production
- Communication is Key: Over-communicate to stakeholders
- Document Everything: Future you will thank current you
- Learn from PIR: Actually implement PIR action items
- Use Standard Changes: Pre-approve repeatable low-risk changes
- Emergency != Undocumented: Emergency changes still need documentation
- ITIL Alignment: Follow the Change Enablement practice
Troubleshooting
"Change stuck in Assess"
Cause: Missing required fields or documentation Solution: Verify all mandatory fields completed; check for validation rules
"Approval taking too long"
Cause: Approver unavailable or notification not received Solution: Contact approver directly; check notification logs; use delegation
"CAB rejected change"
Cause: Insufficient documentation, risk concerns, or timing conflict Solution: Address CAB feedback; resubmit with improvements
"Implementation failed"
Cause: Various - insufficient testing, unexpected conditions Solution: Execute rollback plan; document failure; create problem ticket; reschedule
"Cannot close change"
Cause: Open tasks, missing PIR, or missing closure fields Solution: Complete all tasks; document PIR; fill required closure fields
Change Templates
Normal Change Quick Reference
Type: Normal
CAB Required: Yes (typically)
Lead Time: 5-10 business days
Approval: CAB + Manager
Testing: Full cycleStandard Change Quick Reference
Type: Standard
CAB Required: No (pre-approved)
Lead Time: 1-3 business days
Approval: Automatic
Testing: As per templateEmergency Change Quick Reference
Type: Emergency
CAB Required: Yes (post-implementation ECAB)
Lead Time: Immediate
Approval: Emergency approver (verbal OK, documented later)
Testing: Minimal (risk accepted)Related Skills
itsm/incident-lifecycle- For related incidentsitsm/major-incident- Emergency changes during major incidentsitsm/problem-analysis- Changes for permanent fixesadmin/deployment-workflow- Release coordinationadmin/update-set-management- CMDB updates
References
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

