Skip to main content
Glama

SAP Chat Send Message

sap_chat_send_message

Send a chunked SAP chat message to a room. Public messages store UTF-8 text; private messages store caller-provided ciphertext bytes.

SAP MCP execution guidance: Intent: SAP MCP tool workflow. Pricing: paid read-premium; estimate first, then use sap_payments_call_paid_tool when the runtime cannot replay x402 natively. Routing: paid hosted call; call sap_estimate_tool_cost first, then use sap_payments_call_paid_tool if the runtime cannot handle x402 natively. Signer boundary: hosted reads/builders never receive keypair bytes; value-moving results must be finalized locally when signing is required.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
linksNoOptional signed link references. Each link must include url and may include kind, label, sha256.
topicNoRequired thematic group topic when deriving or writing to topic-scoped groups.
policyNoOptional compact group policy reference or policy hash. Full policy bodies should live off-chain and be linked by hash.
roomIdNoOptional explicit room ID. If omitted, one is derived deterministically.
contentNoPlain UTF-8 message content for public messages.
replyToNoOptional parent message ID.
metadataNoOptional JSON metadata. Keep small; large metadata should be stored off-chain and hashed.
roomKindNoChat room kind: dm, group, or room.
roomNameNoHuman-readable room name for public thematic rooms.
visibilityNoMessage visibility. Defaults to public.
contentTypeNoMIME content type. Defaults to text/plain for public messages.
participantsNoParticipant agent/wallet identifiers for DM or group rooms.
payloadBase64NoBase64 payload. Required for private/ciphertext messages.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contentYesMCP content blocks returned to the caller.
isErrorNoTrue when the tool result represents an application-level error.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / description
      Added value: +"SAP Chat Send Message input schema. Intent: SAP MCP tool workflow. Pricing: paid read-premium; estimate first, then use sap_payments_call_paid_tool when the runtime cannot replay x402 natively. Routing: paid hosted call; call sap_estimate_tool_cost first, then use sap_payments_call_paid_tool if the runtime cannot handle x402 natively. Signer boundary: hosted reads/builders never receive keypair bytes; value-moving results must be finalized locally when signing is required. Use exact field names from this schema; do not guess aliases or include private key material."
  2. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, which are consistent. The description adds that messages are chunked and the distinction between public UTF-8 text and private ciphertext bytes. However, it does not explain chunking behavior, side effects, or authentication requirements. The boilerplate SAP guidance is not specific to this tool's behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is verbose due to repeated SAP MCP execution guidance blocks that are not specific to this tool. The first sentence is concise, but the rest is boilerplate that could be omitted or summarized. This detracts from readability.

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?

Given 13 parameters (0 required), nested objects, and an output schema, the description only covers basic message sending and public/private distinction. It lacks guidance on chunking, room derivation, or handling large payloads. The boilerplate does not compensate for missing tool-specific context.

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 baseline is 3. The tool description does not add parameter-specific information beyond the schema. The schema itself already describes parameters adequately. No extra value from the description.

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 starts with a clear verb+resource: 'Send a chunked SAP chat message to a room.' It also distinguishes between public and private message types. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like sap_chat_start_room or sap_chat_read_all, and the term 'chunked' is not explained.

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 lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., sap_chat_start_room to create a room first, sap_chat_derive_room to compute a room ID). There is no mention of prerequisites, when to use public vs private, or constraints.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.