Skip to main content
Glama
ethanhan2014

SAP ADT MCP Server

by ethanhan2014

get_binding_details

Get OData service binding details such as service URLs, versions, and status by specifying the binding name and optionally the system ID.

Instructions

Get OData service binding details (service URLs, versions, status)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
binding_nameYesService binding name (e.g. ZUI_TRAVEL_O4)
system_idNoSAP system ID (e.g. DEV). Omit to use default system.

Implementation Reference

  • Tool registration for 'get_binding_details' in ListToolsRequestSchema handler. Defines the tool name, description, and input schema (requires binding_name string, optional system_id).
    // --- Service Binding ---
    {
      name: "get_binding_details",
      description: "Get OData service binding details (service URLs, versions, status)",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object" as const,
        properties: {
          binding_name: { type: "string", description: "Service binding name (e.g. ZUI_TRAVEL_O4)" },
          ...SYSTEM_ID_PROP,
        },
        required: ["binding_name"],
      },
    },
  • Handler/case for 'get_binding_details' in CallToolRequestSchema. Parses binding_name from args and calls client.getBindingDetails(binding_name), returning the result as text.
    case "get_binding_details": {
      const { binding_name } = z.object({ binding_name: z.string() }).parse(args);
      const result = await client.getBindingDetails(binding_name);
      return { content: [{ type: "text", text: result }] };
    }
  • The actual implementation of getBindingDetails method on AdtClient. Makes an HTTP GET request to /sap/bc/adt/ddic/srvb/srvbsources/{name} and returns the response data (XML details about the OData service binding).
    async getBindingDetails(name: string): Promise<string> {
      const response = await this.http.get<string>(
        `/sap/bc/adt/ddic/srvb/srvbsources/${encodeURIComponent(name.toUpperCase())}`,
        { headers: { Accept: "*/*" }, responseType: "text" }
      );
      return response.data;
    }
  • ServiceBindingSchema Zod schema used for publish/unpublish (not directly used by get_binding_details, which uses an inline parse with z.object({ binding_name: z.string() }) instead).
    const ServiceBindingSchema = z.object({
      binding_name: z.string(),
      binding_version: z.string(),
    });
  • Input schema for get_binding_details tool registration: requires binding_name (string) plus optional system_id.
    description: "Get OData service binding details (service URLs, versions, status)",
    inputSchema: {
      type: "object" as const,
      properties: {
        binding_name: { type: "string", description: "Service binding name (e.g. ZUI_TRAVEL_O4)" },
        ...SYSTEM_ID_PROP,
      },
      required: ["binding_name"],
    },
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only implies a read operation via 'get' without explicitly stating it is read-only or discussing side effects, permissions, or rate limits. The description lacks sufficient behavioral detail.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core purpose efficiently. Some additional structure (e.g., listing returned fields) might improve readability, but it remains concise.

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?

Given the low complexity (2 params, no output schema), the description provides adequate context by listing the types of details returned. It could specify return format more, but it is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's output.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters (binding_name and system_id). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool retrieves OData service binding details including specific fields like URLs, versions, and status. This distinguishes it from siblings such as publish_service_binding or unpublish_service_binding, which perform different actions.

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?

The description does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. It simply states what the tool does without context for selection.

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

Install Server

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/ethanhan2014/sap-adt-mcp'

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