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

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

CheckDomain

Runs a syntax check on an ABAP domain and returns syntax errors, warnings, and messages. Checks the active version by default or the inactive version after a write.

Instructions

[read-only] Runs a syntax check on the ABAP domain named by domain_name. Returns syntax errors, warnings, and messages. 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": {
      "domain_name": "<domain_name>"
    },
    "name": "CheckDomain"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
versionNoWhich version to check. Without `version` the active version is checked; pass `inactive` for the unsaved one right after a write.
domain_nameYesDomain name.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv20.1.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / version / description
      Previous value: -"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."New value: +"Which version to check. Without `version` the active version is checked; pass `inactive` for the unsaved one right after a write."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv16.0.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / domain_name / description
      Previous value: -"Domain name (e.g., ZDM_MY_DOMAIN)."New value: +"Domain 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"
+}
  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 provided, the description carries the burden. It discloses read-only status, return values (syntax errors, warnings, messages), and special batch-mode recording behavior. It lacks details on permissions or error conditions, but covers key behaviors well.

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 appropriately sized and front-loads the purpose and read-only flag. The batch-mode sentence is somewhat dense but necessary; overall it is efficient with little waste.

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 simple check operation, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description covers purpose, returns, and batch behavior sufficiently. It could more explicitly differentiate from sibling check tools, but for calling the tool it is nearly complete.

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 the schema fully documents both parameters. The description adds no additional meaning about parameters beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline score of 3 appropriate.

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?

The description states a specific verb (runs a syntax check) and resource (ABAP domain named by domain_name). It does not explicitly distinguish from sibling Check* tools (e.g., CheckTable, CheckDataElement), but the domain focus is clear.

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: the tool is for checking domain syntax. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus other Check* tools or when not to use it. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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