Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-abap-adt

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

ActivateStructure

Activates the specified ABAP structure so its inactive version becomes active and in force.

Instructions

Activates the ABAP structure named by structure_name, so its inactive version is in force. Recordable: in batch mode a call is recorded under the next number and answers with empty content; its answer is read by number after the batch ends.

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": {
      "structure_name": "<structure_name>"
    },
    "name": "ActivateStructure"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
detailNoHow much of the answer to return: "terse" (default, the fields you need to act), "full" (the whole parse), "raw" (the document as ADT sent it).terse
structure_nameYesStructure name.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv20.1.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / session_id
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Session ID from GetSession. If not provided, a new session will be created.",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / session_state
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Session state from GetSession (cookies, csrf_token, cookie_store). Required if session_id is provided.",
-  "properties": {
-    "cookie_store": {},
-    "cookies": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "csrf_token": {
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "type": "object"
-}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv16.0.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / detail
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "terse",
+  "description": "How much of the answer to return: \"terse\" (default, the fields you need to act), \"full\" (the whole parse), \"raw\" (the document as ADT sent it).",
+  "enum": [
+    "terse",
+    "full",
+    "raw"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / structure_name / description
      Previous value: -"Structure name (e.g., ZST_MY_STRUCTURE)."New value: +"Structure name."
  3. Addedv6.5.1

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations the description carries the full burden and does meaningful work: it explains the activation semantics and, notably, discloses the non-obvious batch-mode contract (call is recorded under the next number, returns empty content, answer retrieved by number afterwards). It still omits permissions, failure behavior, and whether errors leave the object inactive.

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?

Two compact sentences with the core action front-loaded and no filler. The batch sentence is information-dense but slightly convoluted in phrasing ('answers with empty content; its answer is read by number'), costing a bit of readability.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description must carry behavioral context, and it covers purpose plus the batch-recording quirk well. Gaps remain around preconditions, side effects on the inactive version, and error outcomes for what is a state-changing operation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented, including the terse/full/raw enum for detail. The description only restates that structure_name identifies the ABAP structure and adds nothing about the detail parameter, so baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb (Activates) and resource (ABAP structure), plus the concrete effect (inactive version comes into force). Distinguishes reasonably from ActivateProgram/ActivateClass/ActivateTable by naming the resource, though it never addresses the generic ActivateObjects sibling that could also cover structures.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by the effect statement, and the batch-mode clause hints that the tool is callable inside a batch, but nothing says when to prefer this over ActivateObjects, whether a CheckStructure should run first, or what preconditions must hold.

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