Skip to main content
Glama
fr0ster

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

CreateTransport

Create a new ABAP transport request in an SAP system for development objects, specifying description, owner, target system, and transport type.

Instructions

Create a new ABAP transport request in SAP system for development objects.

Input Schema

TableJSON 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

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It implies a mutation but does not disclose required authorizations, whether the request is immediately released/usable, side effects, or whether a task is auto-created. For a write operation with zero annotation coverage, this is a substantial gap.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though it could carry one more routing or prerequisite clause without becoming bloated.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 5-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should explain prerequisites, permissions, and what is returned/created. It provides only the bare purpose, leaving the agent without the information needed to call it safely in context.

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 all five parameters (owner, detail, description, target_system, transport_type) are already documented. The description adds no parameter detail beyond the schema, 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 (Create) and resource (ABAP transport request) with scope ('for development objects'), so an agent knows exactly what is produced. It does not differentiate from closely related siblings like CreateTransportTask or AddTransportObject, which also act on the transport workflow.

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 explicit guidance on when to create a transport versus a task, when to add objects, or any prerequisite (e.g., must a transport exist first). The agent is left to infer usage from the name alone.

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