GetClass
Retrieve the full source code of any ABAP class by providing its name.
Instructions
Retrieve ABAP class source code
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| class_name | Yes | Name of the ABAP class |
Retrieve the full source code of any ABAP class by providing its name.
Retrieve ABAP class source code
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| class_name | Yes | Name of the ABAP class |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are given, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as required permissions, output format, pagination, or error handling. The minimal description fails to compensate for the lack of annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is extremely concise, comprising a single sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficient.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With no output schema and no annotations, the description is insufficient for a tool that retrieves source code. It omits details about return format, access restrictions, and potential limitations. While simple, it lacks complete context for the agent.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% (only parameter 'class_name' has a description). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 applies as the schema already documents the parameter.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description 'Retrieve ABAP class source code' clearly states the action (retrieve) and resource (ABAP class source code). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like GetFunction, GetInclude, etc., which retrieve different object types.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools are listed but no explicit conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/SproitNET/mcp-abap-adt'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server