SAP MCP Server

Fetch Protocol Index

sap_fetch_protocol_index

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch a SAP protocol index by protocol ID. SAP MCP context: Read-only SAP SDK wrapper against the configured Solana RPC and SAP program. Use these reads to inspect current chain state before mutating registry, payment, reputation, memory, or tool accounts.

SAP MCP execution guidance: Intent: read/discovery workflow. Pricing: priced by hosted x402 challenge. 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

Name	Required	Description	Default
`protocolId`	No	Protocol ID to fetch the index for (e.g. "jupiter", "adrena")

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`content`	Yes	MCP content blocks returned to the caller.
`isError`	No	True when the tool result represents an application-level error.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedJul 26, 2026

changedInput schema / description

Previous value: -"Fetch Protocol Index input schema. Intent: read/discovery workflow. Pricing: free; call directly without x402. Routing: free hosted call; call directly and keep it small/exact when possible. 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."New value: +"Fetch Protocol Index input schema. Intent: read/discovery workflow. Pricing: priced by hosted x402 challenge. 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."

Changed1 schema field changedJul 26, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / protocolId / description

Previous value: -"Protocol ID to fetch the index for (e.g. \"jupiter\", \"drift\")"New value: +"Protocol ID to fetch the index for (e.g. \"jupiter\", \"adrena\")"

Changed1 schema field changedJul 24, 2026

addedInput schema / description

Added value: +"Fetch Protocol Index input schema. Intent: read/discovery workflow. Pricing: free; call directly without x402. Routing: free hosted call; call directly and keep it small/exact when possible. 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."

First observedJul 13, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds value by noting pricing via x402 challenge and security boundary (no keypair bytes), which are beyond annotation hints.

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 dominated by generic SAP MCP boilerplate that is repeated across tools. The actual tool-specific part is just one sentence, making it padded and not concise.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the presence of an output schema and well-documented parameter, the description is minimally adequate. It lacks specific context about what a protocol index is or how to discover protocol IDs, but the boilerplate provides some workflow 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 coverage is 100% and the parameter description in the schema is clear ('Protocol ID to fetch the index for...'). The tool description does not add any additional parameter semantics.

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 states 'Fetch a SAP protocol index by protocol ID,' which clearly identifies the verb and resource. However, the input schema indicates no required parameters, while the description implies protocolId is necessary, creating a slight inconsistency.

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?

No specific guidance on when to use this tool versus similar fetch tools (e.g., sap_fetch_capability_index). The boilerplate about general read intent does not differentiate this tool.

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

All SAP MCP Server tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.