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

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

GetObjectStructure

Returns the ADT structure of a repository object by type and name as a compact JSON tree, with optional terse, full, or raw detail for acting on SAP objects.

Instructions

[read-only] Returns the ADT structure of the repository object named by objecttype and objectname as a compact JSON tree. 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": {
      "objecttype": "<objecttype>",
      "objectname": "<objectname>"
    },
    "name": "GetObjectStructure"
  }
}

Input 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
objectnameYesADT object name (e.g. /CBY/ACQ_DDL)
objecttypeYesADT object type (e.g. DDLS/DF)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field 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"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
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 meaningful work: it declares [read-only], describes the return as a compact JSON tree, and discloses the non-obvious batch-mode contract where the call returns empty content and the result must be retrieved by number later. It omits permission requirements and failure behavior, but the batch disclosure is genuinely valuable context not present in the schema.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action before the batch caveat, and nothing redundant. The batch sentence is dense but every clause (recording, empty response, read-by-number) is needed to use the tool correctly.

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

Completeness3/5

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

No output schema exists, so the description is the only place return values could be explained, and 'compact JSON tree' is a thin account of a structure tree whose node shape is unknown. Given a read-only, three-parameter tool with fully documented params, it is adequate but leaves the agent guessing about the response format and error cases.

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%, including an enum for detail with a full explanation of terse/full/raw, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds only the output-shape hint (compact JSON tree) and no syntax or naming detail beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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: returns the ADT structure of the repository object identified by objecttype/objectname, with the output shape (compact JSON tree) named. It does not differentiate itself from close siblings such as GetObjectInfo, GetTypeInfo, or GetStructure, so an agent must infer which of these generic object-readers to pick.

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?

No guidance on when to prefer this over GetObjectInfo/GetStructure/DescribeByList, and no prerequisites stated. The only usage instruction concerns batch mechanics (recorded under the next number, answer read afterwards), which is a calling procedure rather than a selection rule.

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