Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
bw-modeling-mcp

bw-modeling-mcp

by dnic-dev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

bw_activate_process_chain

Activate an existing SAP BW/4HANA process chain (RSPC) via the REST API, retrieving activation status and error logs to ensure successful execution.

Instructions

Activate an existing Process Chain (RSPC) via the BW/4HANA Cockpit REST API. Use this after bw_create_process_chain (with activate=false) or to re-activate a modified chain. Returns the top-level activation message, severity, and full log entries. Surfaces any log entries with severity "error" in a dedicated errors field.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "bw_activate_process_chain"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesProcess chain technical name (e.g. "CHAIN_NAME"). Case-insensitive.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.9.1

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses it activates (mutation), returns message, severity, and log entries, and surfaces errors. It does not mention if the chain must be inactive or if activation is synchronous, but provides good insight overall.

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 two terse sentences front-loaded with the main action. No redundant words; every sentence adds value.

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?

Given the low complexity (one parameter), full schema coverage, and clear return value description, the tool is well-documented and complete for its scope.

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 coverage is 100% with a clear description including case-insensitivity. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, earning a baseline 3.

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 description clearly states it activates an existing Process Chain via the BW/4HANA Cockpit REST API, and distinguishes from sibling tools like bw_create_process_chain by specifying the use case after creation or reactivation.

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 says when to use: after bw_create_process_chain with activate=false or to re-activate a modified chain. It does not state when not to use, but the context is clear enough.

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