Skip to main content
Glama

ABAP Keyword Documentation

sap_abap_docs
Read-onlyIdempotent

Find ABAP keyword documentation for your current SAP system release. Enter a keyword or follow topic links to get readable, release-accurate F1 help.

Instructions

Look up the system's own ABAP keyword documentation (F1 help, release-correct for this system) by keyword, reduced to readable text. Follow links from a previous result via the uri argument to navigate to sub-topics.

Args:

  • query (string): keyword or phrase to look up, OR

  • uri (string): a topic key from a previous result's links.

  • max_chars (number): 1000-20000 (default 8000).

  • response_format.

Returns (json): { query?, uri?, title?, text, truncatedAtMaxChars, links: [{title, uri}] }.

Examples:

  • "What does LOOP AT ... GROUP BY do on this release?" -> query='LOOP AT GROUP BY'.

  • "Show me the SELECT statement documentation" -> query='SELECT', then uri='ABAPSELECT' from the links to open the statement itself. Notes:

  • This is the documentation installed on THIS system, so it matches its ABAP release rather than the newest online version.

  • Language is fixed to EN this round.

  • The source is HTML reduced to text, so formatting (tables, syntax diagrams) is approximate — follow a link for depth rather than raising max_chars far.

  • A broad keyword returns a hit list: mostly links with little body text. Pick a link's uri and call again.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
uriNoA topic key taken from a previous result's links (e.g. 'ABAPSELECT') — navigates directly to that topic. Provide query OR uri.
queryNoKeyword or phrase (e.g. 'SELECT', 'FIELD-SYMBOLS', 'LOOP AT GROUP BY').
max_charsNoCap on the reduced documentation text (1000-20000, default 8000).
response_formatNoOutput format: 'markdown' (human-readable, default) or 'json' (structured).markdown
Install Server

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond that: release-specific content matching this system, fixed EN language, HTML-to-text formatting approximation, and the hit-list behavior for broad queries. No contradiction with 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 well-structured with Args, Returns, Examples, and Notes. The opening sentence immediately communicates the tool's purpose, and every section provides useful operational detail without redundancy or filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

There is no output schema, so the description compensates by explicitly listing the return shape and fields. It also covers the two-step navigation pattern, broad-query behavior, language constraint, release correctness, and text-format limitations, giving an agent enough context to invoke the tool and interpret results correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters. The description adds extra semantics by explaining the query-vs-uri relationship, giving concrete example values like 'LOOP AT GROUP BY' and 'ABAPSELECT', and advising to follow links for depth instead of raising max_chars. This goes beyond the schema's field-level descriptions.

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 first sentence states a specific verb and resource: look up the system's own ABAP keyword documentation (F1 help, release-correct for this system). It clearly distinguishes this from generic web documentation or other ABAP tools by emphasizing the system-local, release-correct scope.

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?

The description gives a clear workflow: query for a keyword, then follow a returned link's uri to navigate to sub-topics. It also advises not to raise max_chars too far and instead follow links, and it explains that broad keywords return hit lists. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools, but the usage context is concrete and actionable.

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

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/appmaster3000/sap-abap-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server