Skip to main content
Glama
fr0ster

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

CreateClass

Creates a new ABAP class in an SAP system, starting in initial state. Set source code with UpdateClass.

Instructions

Create a new ABAP class in SAP system. Creates the class object in initial state. Use UpdateClass to set source code.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
finalNoMark class as final. Default: false
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
abstractNoMark class as abstract. Default: false
class_nameYesClass name.
superclassNoOptional superclass name.
descriptionNoClass description (defaults to class_name).
package_nameYesPackage name.
master_languageNoOptional master/original language for the created object (e.g. "EN", "DE", "ZH"). Defaults to the session language (SAP_LANGUAGE) or EN.
create_protectedNoProtected constructor. Default: false
transport_requestNoTransport request number (required for transportable packages), not a task.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv16.0.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / class_name / description
      Previous value: -"Class name (e.g., ZCL_TEST_CLASS_001)."New value: +"Class name."
    • 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 / package_name / description
      Previous value: -"Package name (e.g., ZOK_LAB, $TMP)."New value: +"Package name."
    • changedInput schema / properties / transport_request / description
      Previous value: -"Transport request number (required for transportable packages)."New value: +"Transport request number (required for transportable packages), not a task."
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv8.1.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / master_language
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional master/original language for the created object (e.g. \"EN\", \"DE\", \"ZH\"). Defaults to the session language (SAP_LANGUAGE) or EN.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / activate
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Activate after creation. Default: true.",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / source_code
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Full ABAP class source code. If omitted, a minimal template is generated.",
-  "type": "string"
-}
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations, so the description carries the burden. It usefully discloses that the object is created in initial (inactive) state, which is non-obvious behavior in SAP, but omits permission/authorization needs, the transport requirement implied by the transport_request param, and whether a subsequent activation is mandatory.

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?

Three short sentences, zero filler, with the core action stated first and the sibling hand-off last. Nothing redundant with the schema.

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 10-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential post-creation state and the follow-up tool. It stops short of mentioning activation requirements or authorization/transport constraints that an agent would need to complete the workflow.

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 every parameter is already documented in the schema, including defaults, enum values, and the transport_request caveat. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, making the baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Create a new ABAP class'), names the target system, and describes the resulting state ('initial state'), which separates it from GetClass/UpdateClass/ActivateClass siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly routes the agent to UpdateClass for the follow-up source-code step, which is the natural next action after creation. It does not state when NOT to use it (e.g. class already exists, activation prerequisites), so it falls short of a full 5.

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