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

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

GetDomain

Reads an ABAP domain's ADT metadata in one request, returning its definition, package, and description for active or inactive versions. Use it to inspect domain properties in SAP systems.

Instructions

[read-only] Reads the ABAP domain named by domain_name in one request: its ADT metadata document (definition, package, description). Returns it under metadata, with part: "metadata". 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": {
      "domain_name": "<domain_name>"
    },
    "name": "GetDomain"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
versionNoVersion to read: "active" (default) for deployed version, "inactive" for modified but not activated version.active
domain_nameYesDomain name.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv16.0.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / domain_name / description
      Previous value: -"Domain name (e.g., Z_MY_DOMAIN)."New value: +"Domain name."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does reasonably well: it discloses read-only behavior, one-request metadata retrieval, return under `metadata` with `part: "metadata"`, and batch recording semantics including empty answers and later answer retrieval by number. It omits permission/error behavior, which keeps it from 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The definition is front-loaded with the purpose and return shape, and the second sentence efficiently covers batch-mode recording behavior. Both sentences earn their place and there is no filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a simple two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description explains the return envelope and batch behavior sufficiently for correct invocation. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to understand what the tool does and returns.

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 both parameters are already documented in the schema, including the version enum. The description mentions `domain_name` but adds no version semantics or other parameter guidance beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

The description states a specific verb ("Reads") and resource ("ABAP domain") and narrows scope to the ADT metadata document with its definition, package, and description. It does not explicitly name a sibling such as CheckDomain or ActivateDomain to sharpen differentiation, so it falls short of 5.

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?

It clearly marks the tool as read-only and explains batch-mode behavior, but gives no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or alternative-tool routing. Usage is only implied by "read-only" and "metadata document."

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