Skip to main content
Glama
fr0ster

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

DeleteDataElement

Delete an ABAP data element from an SAP system using the ADT deletion API. Include a transport request for transportable objects; optional for local ones.

Instructions

Delete an ABAP data element from the SAP system via ADT deletion API. Transport request optional for local objects.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
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
data_element_nameYesData element name.
transport_requestNoTransport request number, not a task. Required for transportable objects. Optional for local objects.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv16.0.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / data_element_name / description
      Previous value: -"Data element name (e.g., Z_MY_DATA_ELEMENT)."New value: +"Data element 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 / transport_request / description
      Previous value: -"Transport request number (e.g., E19K905635). Required for transportable objects. Optional for local objects ($TMP)."New value: +"Transport request number, not a task. Required for transportable objects. Optional for local objects."
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, but it only states the action and a transport nuance. It does not disclose irreversibility, authorization requirements, what happens to the object in packages/transports, or error/edge conditions for a destructive operation.

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 short sentences with the core action front-loaded. The "via ADT deletion API" phrase is a minor, slightly redundant addition but overall the entry is tight.

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?

For a low-complexity delete with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the essentials are present. But with no annotations and a destructive action, more on behavior (reversibility, permissions, failure modes) would complete it.

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% (all three params documented, including the transport_request conditional), so the baseline is 3. The description adds nothing about parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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+resource ("Delete an ABAP data element") which is distinguishable from siblings like DeleteDomain, DeleteTable, DeleteStructure by the resource. However "via ADT deletion API" is implementation trivia that doesn't sharpen the purpose.

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?

The note "Transport request optional for local objects" gives one conditional usage cue, but there is no when-to-use vs alternatives guidance (e.g. relative to UpdateDataElement or conditions under which deletion fails or should be deferred). Usage is only implied.

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