Skip to main content
Glama
fr0ster

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

DeleteServiceDefinition

Delete an ABAP service definition from an SAP system through ADT, optionally supplying a transport request for transportable objects.

Instructions

Delete an ABAP service definition 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.
service_definition_nameYesServiceDefinition 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 / service_definition_name / description
      Previous value: -"ServiceDefinition name (e.g., Z_MY_SERVICEDEFINITION)."New value: +"ServiceDefinition 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

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It conveys that this is a real deletion on the SAP system but never states that it is irreversible, whether it applies to active or inactive versions, what happens to the transport entry, or what permission/auth is needed. Only the transport-request nuance adds context.

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 and no filler. Nothing is wasted, though the second sentence is only a partial constraint rather than a complete usage statement.

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, annotation-free tool with no output schema, the description omits the essentials an agent needs: irreversibility, side effects on active objects or transports, and failure behavior. The transport hint is the sole compensating detail.

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 three parameters (including the detail enum) are already documented in the schema; baseline 3 applies. The description's transport note duplicates the schema's own wording rather than adding new semantics.

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 (delete) and resource (ABAP service definition) plus the mechanism (ADT deletion API), which is unambiguous against the many Get*/Update* siblings. It does not, however, differentiate itself from the parallel Delete* family (DeleteServiceBinding, DeleteDomain) 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 Guidelines2/5

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

The only usage signal is 'Transport request optional for local objects,' which is a partial prerequisite. There is no statement of when to delete vs. other lifecycle operations, no preconditions (must the object be inactive/unlocked?), and no mention of what to do if the deletion fails.

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