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

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

GetPackage

Reads an ABAP package's ADT metadata—description, super-package, and sub-packages—in one request, with active or inactive version and detail level.

Instructions

[read-only] Reads the ABAP package named by package_name in one request: its ADT metadata document (description, super-package, sub-packages, ...), active or inactive version. Returns it under metadata, with part: "metadata": a summary, the details or the document as SAP sent it, per detail. 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": {
      "package_name": "<package_name>"
    },
    "name": "GetPackage"
  }
}

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

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 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 / package_name / description
      Previous value: -"Package name (e.g., Z_MY_PACKAGE)."New value: +"Package name."
  2. 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 provided, the description carries the full burden and does well: it declares read-only, discloses the return shape (under `metadata`, `part: "metadata"`), and explains the batch-mode quirk where a call records a number and answers with empty content later. It does not cover error behavior or permissions, keeping it from a 5.

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 read-only marker and the core action, with the batch caveat last. It is dense but every clause carries information; minor length could be trimmed but nothing is wasted.

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?

There is no output schema, yet the description explains where the result lands (`metadata` / `part: "metadata"`) and how detail/version affect it, plus batch-mode semantics. Error and edge-case handling are omitted, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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 schema already documents detail, version, and package_name with enums. The description only loosely reinforces the detail levels ('a summary, the details or the document as SAP sent it'), adding little beyond the schema, so the 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?

The description names a specific verb (reads) and resource (ABAP package by package_name) and states what is returned (the ADT metadata document, active or inactive). It doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from nearby siblings like GetPackageContents or GetPackageTree, so it lands just short of a 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?

Usage is implied (reading a package's metadata) and the batch-mode recording behavior is explained, but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over GetPackageContents, GetPackageTree, or CheckPackage, nor any stated exclusions.

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