Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
abapsmith

abapsmith

by Freight-Art
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

abap_debug_value

Read-only

Drill into a single ABAP debug variable to view its detailed value, with pagination for table rows and adjustable nesting depth.

Instructions

Tier-2 drill-in: render one variable path in detail, with a row window for tables.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "stateId": "<stateId>",
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "abap_debug_value"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fromNoFirst row — tables only. Default 1.
pathYesVariable path, e.g. LT_ITEMS[42]-MATNR. Field symbols keep their angle brackets, e.g. <LS_ITEM>. Unknown paths return empty, not NOT_FOUND.
countNoTables only. Default 20, max 200. Page with "from".
depthNoMax nesting depth. Default 3.
stateIdYesFrom the most recent start/step/stack/frame response (12-char token; full id or a prefix of at least 8 chars also accepted).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.6.25
    • changedInput schema / properties / stateId / description
      Previous value: -"From the most recent start/step/stack/frame response."New value: +"From the most recent start/step/stack/frame response (12-char token; full id or a prefix of at least 8 chars also accepted)."
  2. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds 'with a row window for tables', which is also documented in the schema's 'from' and 'count' parameter descriptions. No additional behavioral context is provided, such as how paths are resolved, what happens on unknown paths (though the schema notes this), or any side effects (none due to read-only). The description adds little beyond the purpose itself, so it only slightly goes beyond the annotations.

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?

The description is a single sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('render one variable path in detail') and includes a key detail ('row window for tables') that informs both purpose and usage. Every word adds value; it is concise, structured, and easy to parse. There is no fluff or repetition.

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?

For a read-only drill-in tool with all parameters documented in the schema, the description is adequate. It states the main function and a notable pagination feature. It does not describe the output format or structure, but since there is no output schema, an agent might benefit from a hint about the return shape. However, given the tool's simplicity and the schema's thorough parameter coverage, the description is sufficiently complete for correct invocation. The only minor gap is the lack of explicit return-value information.

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%, meaning all five parameters have descriptions in the schema. The tool description itself does not elaborate on any parameter beyond what the schema provides—'row window for tables' duplicates the 'tables only' notes for 'from' and 'count'. Therefore, the description contributes no additional parameter meaning, and the baseline score of 3 applies because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states a specific action ('render one variable path in detail') and a specific resource ('one variable path'). The term 'Tier-2 drill-in' implies this is a deeper dive following a higher-level listing, likely abap_debug_vars among the siblings. It differentiates from the sibling set by indicating a focused, single-variable operation, though it does not name an exact alternative. This is clear and moderately distinguishing, but not at the level of explicitly naming the sibling it differs from.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage context is only implied via 'Tier-2 drill-in', which suggests it should be used after an initial variable listing (e.g., abap_debug_vars), but there is no explicit statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or conditions. The phrase 'Tier-2' is a weak implicit signal but leaves the agent to infer the appropriate workflow. No alternative tool is named or contrasted.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools