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

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

GetFunctionGroup

Reads an ABAP function group's package, description, and contents by name in one request, returning ADT metadata; optionally selects active or inactive version.

Instructions

[read-only] Reads the ABAP function group named by function_group_name in one request: its ADT metadata document (package, description, contents). 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": {
      "function_group_name": "<function_group_name>"
    },
    "name": "GetFunctionGroup"
  }
}

Input Schema

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

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv16.0.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / function_group_name / description
      Previous value: -"FunctionGroup name (e.g., Z_MY_FUNCTIONGROUP)."New value: +"FunctionGroup 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 supplied, the description carries the burden and does well: it declares read-only, specifies the exact return shape (`metadata` key, `part: "metadata"`), and discloses the non-obvious batch-mode behavior where the call records under a sequence number and returns empty content whose answer must be fetched later. It stops short of covering failure modes (e.g., nonexistent group) or any authorization constraints.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then return shape, then the batch caveat — a sensible ordering. The batch sentence is long and slightly dense, but it conveys information an agent cannot get elsewhere, so it earns its place.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description steps in to explain the response envelope and the batch recording semantics, which is exactly what is missing elsewhere. The remaining gap is edge-case behavior (missing or inactive function group, interaction with the `version` parameter), which is minor for a simple getter.

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%, including a documented enum for `version`, so the schema already does the heavy lifting. The description only references `function_group_name` as the lookup key and adds no syntax, format, or version-selection guidance beyond it — the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Reads the ABAP function group') and scopes it precisely to the ADT metadata document, listing what that document contains (package, description, contents). This distinguishes it from siblings such as GetFunctionModule (module source) and CheckFunctionGroup (validation) without needing to name them.

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 '[read-only]' tag and the batch-mode note imply this is the read-side call for a function group's definition, but the description never says when to prefer it over CheckFunctionGroup, ListFunctionModules, or the version/diff tools. Usage is inferable rather than stated, with no exclusions offered.

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