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

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

GetClass

Reads an ABAP class in one request, returning either its source code (active or inactive version) or its ADT metadata such as package, responsible, and description.

Instructions

[read-only] Reads the ABAP class named by class_name in one request: its source code (part "source", the default; active or inactive version) or its ADT metadata document (part "metadata": package, responsible, description). Returns the part read. 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": {
      "class_name": "<class_name>"
    },
    "name": "GetClass"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
partNoThe document to read: "source" (default) the source code, "metadata" the ADT metadata document (package, responsible, description, ...).source
versionNoVersion of the source: "active" (default) for the deployed version, "inactive" for the modified version awaiting activation.active
class_nameYesClass name.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv20.1.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / part
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "source",
+  "description": "The document to read: \"source\" (default) the source code, \"metadata\" the ADT metadata document (package, responsible, description, ...).",
+  "enum": [
+    "source",
+    "metadata"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / version / description
      Previous value: -"Version to read: \"active\" (default) for deployed version, \"inactive\" for modified but not activated version."New value: +"Version of the source: \"active\" (default) for the deployed version, \"inactive\" for the modified version awaiting activation."
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv16.0.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / class_name / description
      Previous value: -"Class name (e.g., ZCL_MY_CLASS)."New value: +"Class name."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the load and does so well: it self-declares read-only, explains that exactly one part is returned, and discloses the non-obvious batch-mode behavior where calls return empty content and are read back by number. It stops short of covering failure modes (class not found, inactive version missing) or permission requirements.

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?

The purpose and return contract are front-loaded, and the batch caveat is correctly deferred to the end. The batch sentence is dense but every clause (recording, empty answer, read by number) is actionable information rather than filler.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a 3-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the selection space (part, version), what is returned, and the batch interaction quirk. Missing only error/edge-case behavior, which is a minor gap at this complexity level.

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% and the enums are documented inline, so the schema already conveys part/version semantics. The description restates the same defaults and meanings without adding format or edge-case detail, making it a baseline 3.

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?

It states a precise verb and resource ("Reads the ABAP class named by class_name") and enumerates the two documents it can return, source or ADT metadata, including the active/inactive version axis. It does not contrast itself with closely-named siblings such as GetClassVersionSource or GetClassVersions, so an agent cannot fully rule those out from the text alone.

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 implied clearly enough (read current class source or metadata), but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no mention of the versioned-read siblings as alternatives. An agent must infer routing from the tool name and sibling list.

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