Skip to main content
Glama
fr0ster

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

DeleteFunctionGroup

Deletes an ABAP function group from an SAP system via the ADT deletion API. Provide the function group name and an optional transport request for transportable objects.

Instructions

Delete an ABAP function group 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
transport_requestNoTransport request number, not a task. Required for transportable objects. Optional for local objects.
function_group_nameYesFunctionGroup name.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields 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"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / function_group_name / description
      Previous value: -"FunctionGroup name (e.g., Z_MY_FUNCTIONGROUP)."New value: +"FunctionGroup name."
    • 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

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It notes the transport caveat but does not disclose consequences of deletion (whether includes and function modules are removed, reversibility, required authorization, or whether a prior CheckFunctionGroup is needed). For a destructive mutation this is a significant 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?

Two tight sentences with no filler, and the core action is front-loaded before the transport caveat. Efficient and readable.

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 destructive operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is thin. It omits deletion consequences, permission requirements, and error/failure behavior, leaving the agent under-informed about a high-impact action.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters, setting the baseline at 3. The description reinforces transport_request semantics (required for transportable, optional for local) but adds nothing for function_group_name or detail beyond the schema.

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: 'Delete an ABAP function group ... via ADT deletion API.' An agent can immediately tell what the tool does. It does not, however, distinguish itself from sibling delete tools (DeleteFunctionModule, DeleteFunctionInclude) beyond the resource name.

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?

Adds a conditional about transport_request ('optional for local objects'), which is useful invocation guidance, but offers no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives (e.g., when to delete vs activate, or how it relates to DeleteFunctionModule/Include). Usage is implied rather than stated.

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