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

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

CreateTransport

Creates a new ABAP transport request in an SAP system for development objects, letting you set the description, owner, transport type, and target system.

Instructions

Create a new ABAP transport request in SAP system for development objects. 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": {
      "description": "<description>"
    },
    "name": "CreateTransport"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ownerNoTransport owner (optional, defaults to current user)
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
descriptionYesTransport request description (mandatory)
target_systemNoTarget system for transport (optional, e.g., 'PRD', 'QAS'). If not provided or empty, uses 'LOCAL'
transport_typeNoTransport type: 'workbench' (cross-client) or 'customizing' (client-specific)workbench

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field 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"
+}
  2. First observed

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 burden, and it does add genuine behavioral context about batch mode: the call is recorded, returns empty content, and is read back by number after the batch ends. It omits other important traits for a mutating tool — permissions needed, whether an empty/duplicate request is created, and what the normal (non-batch) response contains.

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 sentences, purpose front-loaded, no filler. The second sentence is dense and slightly cryptic ('Recordable', 'under the next number') but each part conveys real information.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should indicate what a successful call returns — presumably the transport number/ID — but it only describes the anomalous batch case where content is empty. For a five-parameter create operation the behavioral picture is adequate but not 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%, with owner, description, target_system, transport_type and detail all documented including defaults and enum meanings, so the baseline is 3. The description adds nothing about parameters beyond what the schema already says — notably it never mentions target_system defaulting to 'LOCAL' or the transport_type split.

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 and resource: 'Create a new ABAP transport request ... for development objects', which is concretely distinguishable from ListTransports/GetTransport/ReadTransportObjects. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the closely related CreateTransportTask sibling, so an agent must infer request-vs-task semantics on its own.

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 only implied by the phrase 'for development objects'. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not, and no routing to CreateTransportTask or AddTransportObject for follow-up steps. The batch-mode note hints at one usage context (batch recording) but does not frame it as a selection rule.

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