Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ABAP-ADT-API MCP-Server

ABAP-ADT-API MCP-Server

by dachienit
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

debuggerGoToStack

Navigate to a specific stack entry in the debugger to inspect code execution flow and debug ABAP programs efficiently.

Instructions

Navigates to a specific stack entry in the debugger.

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": {
      "urlOrPosition": "<urlOrPosition>"
    },
    "name": "debuggerGoToStack"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlOrPositionYesThe URL or position of the stack entry.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the navigation action without explaining side effects (e.g., changing the current debugger frame, affecting subsequent variable/step commands) or prerequisites like an active debug session.

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, directly front-loaded with the action and target, containing no unnecessary words or repetitive information.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple one-parameter tool, the description is minimally viable but lacks important context such as when it should be invoked relative to other debugger tools and what effect navigation has on subsequent operations. This leaves clear gaps in the agent's ability to use it correctly.

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?

The single parameter 'urlOrPosition' is already described in the schema as 'The URL or position of the stack entry,' and schema coverage is 100%. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond this, so the baseline score applies.

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 'Navigates to a specific stack entry in the debugger' uses a specific verb ('navigates') and resource ('stack entry in the debugger'), making the core function clear. It is distinct from sibling tools like debuggerStackTrace (lists stack frames) or debuggerStep (steps execution), though it does not explicitly reference them.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No usage context is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool (e.g., after obtaining a stack trace) or when alternatives might be more appropriate, leaving the agent without guidance on selecting this tool.

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