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

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

ActivateTable

Activates a specified ABAP database table so its inactive version takes effect, making pending table changes active in the SAP system.

Instructions

Activates the ABAP database table named by table_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": {
      "table_name": "<table_name>"
    },
    "name": "ActivateTable"
  }
}

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
table_nameYesTable 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 / table_name / description
      Previous value: -"Table name (e.g., ZTB_MY_TABLE)."New value: +"Table name."
  3. Addedv6.5.1

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the mutation effect and specific batch-mode behavior: calls are recorded, return empty content, and answers are read by number afterward. It omits other important behavioral details such as permissions, failure modes, and normal response behavior outside batch mode.

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 front-loaded with the core activation behavior and is only two sentences. The second sentence adds relevant batch-mode information without unnecessary repetition or filler.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the main action and unusual batch behavior. However, it does not explain the normal response shape, error behavior, or prerequisites, leaving gaps that an agent would need to infer.

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%, and the schema already documents both table_name and detail. The description reinforces that table_name identifies the table to activate but adds no meaning for the detail parameter beyond what the schema provides, so the 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 uses a specific verb and resource: it activates the ABAP database table identified by table_name and makes its inactive version active. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling activation tools such as ActivateProgram, ActivateClass, and ActivateStructure.

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?

The phrase 'so its inactive version is in force' implies the table must already have an inactive version, which gives some usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose ActivateTable over ActivateObjects or when not to use it, nor does it mention prerequisites or alternatives.

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