Skip to main content
Glama
fr0ster

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

CheckDataElement

Check an ABAP data element for syntax errors, warnings, and messages to validate it before activation.

Instructions

Perform syntax check on an ABAP data element. Returns syntax errors, warnings, and messages.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
versionNoWhich version to check. Defaults to the inactive one, what a caller wants right after a write; an object that is only active has no inactive version, and SAP answers such a check with "Error while importing object … from the database" — ask for active.
data_element_nameYesData element name.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv16.0.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / data_element_name / description
      Previous value: -"Data element name (e.g., ZDE_MY_ELEMENT)."New value: +"Data element name."
    • addedInput schema / properties / version
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Which version to check. Defaults to the inactive one, what a caller wants right after a write; an object that is only active has no inactive version, and SAP answers such a check with \"Error while importing object … from the database\" — ask for active.",
+  "enum": [
+    "active",
+    "inactive"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Addedv6.5.1

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
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 that the tool is a non-mutating check and what it returns (errors, warnings, messages), but it omits the version-default pitfall (defaults to inactive, which fails for active-only objects) and any auth/permission context.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, then the return content. No filler or repetition.

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?

For a simple read-only check with no output schema, the description adequately covers both what the tool does and what it returns. The remaining gap is the unmentioned version-default behavior, which matters for correct invocation but is documented in the schema.

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%: both parameters, including the tricky version enum, are thoroughly documented in the schema itself. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the 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 ('perform syntax check') and resource ('ABAP data element'), which cleanly separates it from the many sibling Check* tools (CheckClass, CheckTable, CheckStructure). It does not explicitly name or contrast with those siblings, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as GetDataElement, CheckTable, or RunATC, nor any note about prerequisites (e.g., the object must exist). The description is purely declarative.

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