abap-adt-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

adt_list_function_group

Lists all function modules and includes in a given function group, showing name, URI, and description. Useful for discovering available modules before calling or reading them.

Instructions

List the function modules (and includes) contained in a function group (SE37). Returns each module's name, URI and description. Useful for discovering what a group offers before calling/reading a module.

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": {
      "functionGroup": "<functionGroup>"
    },
    "name": "adt_list_function_group"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`functionGroup`	Yes	Function group name, e.g. ZAIRFC_TOOLS

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 28, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes the operation as listing and returning data, implicitly safe, but does not explicitly state it is read-only or mention any constraints like authorization or rate limits. Adequate but could be more explicit.

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?

Two sentences: first sentence states action and output, second provides usage context. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with key information.

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 simple list operation with one parameter, the description adequately explains what the tool does, what it returns, and when to use it. No output schema, but return values are described. Slightly more detail on potential limitations (e.g., if large groups) could be added.

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?

Only one parameter (functionGroup) with 100% schema coverage already describing it as a function group name. The description reinforces that the parameter is the group to list, but adds minimal new meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states the tool lists function modules and includes in a function group, with specific verb 'list' and resource 'function modules'. It also mentions returning name, URI, and description, distinguishing it from siblings like adt_read_function_module.

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?

Explicitly states it is useful for discovering what a group offers before calling/reading a module, giving clear when-to-use context. However, it does not list alternatives or exclusions, which would improve guidance.

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