mcp-abap-adt

CreateCDSObject

Create a clean-core Z wrapper CDS view for P4 cases without SAP successors. Review the scaffold via dry-run before generating the view.

Instructions

Create a new Z wrapper CDS view (Level A — clean core safe). Used for P4 cases where no SAP successor exists. Always dry_run: true by default — review the scaffold before creating.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`fields`	No	Fields to expose. Each field: { name, alias?, is_key?, label? }
`dry_run`	No	If true (default), returns scaffold only without creating in SAP.
`raw_ddl`	No	Full CDS DDL source to write verbatim. Use for JOINs or complex views. When provided, base_source and fields are not required.
`maxLines`	No	Maximum lines to return (1-100000). Omit to request the rest; the byte cap may return fewer lines.
`startLine`	No	1-based line number to start from (default 1). Beyond EOF returns an empty page with hasMore=false.
`view_name`	Yes	Z-prefixed name for the new view (e.g. ZW_COSTELEMENTWRAPPER)
`base_source`	No	The underlying database table or view to select from (derived from the old C/D view's base)
`description`	No	EndUserText.label description for the new view
`package_name`	No	Target package for the new view
`transport_request`	No	Transport request task number (corrNr) required when package_name is not $TMP (e.g. I10K903769)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.2.0Sep 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the default dry_run behavior and that it creates a scaffold for review. It does not detail the creation side effects (e.g., transport requirements) but the schema covers those parameters, and the clean core safety note adds context.

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?

Three sentences, each adding distinct value: the core action and context, the use case, and the default behavior with guidance. The information is front-loaded and there is no wasted text.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (10 parameters), the schema already documents each parameter thoroughly. The description adds essential context about when to use it and the dry_run default, which is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly. It does not describe the return format, but that is acceptable given the 'review the scaffold' hint.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all parameters are documented. The description adds the key behavioral detail that dry_run defaults to true and that a scaffold is produced, which reinforces the dry_run parameter's purpose. This goes slightly beyond the schema's description, so it earns a 4.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the tool creates a new Z wrapper CDS view, specifies it is Level A clean core safe, and that it is for P4 cases with no SAP successor. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like CreateCDSExtension, which serves a different purpose.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It explicitly states when to use this tool (P4 cases, no SAP successor) and advises reviewing the scaffold before creating via the default dry_run behavior. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide.

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

CreateCDSObject

Instructions

Input Schema

Schema Changelog

TDQS

Other Tools