Skip to main content
Glama
fr0ster

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

GetPackageTree

Retrieve the hierarchical tree of an SAP package, including subpackages and objects with names, types, and descriptions. Use it to explore or analyze package contents.

Instructions

[high-level] Retrieve complete package tree structure including subpackages and objects. Returns hierarchical tree with object names, types, and descriptions.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
debugNoInclude diagnostic metadata in response (counts, types, hierarchy info). Default: false
max_depthNoMaximum depth for recursive package traversal. Default: 5
package_nameYesPackage name
include_subpackagesNoInclude subpackages recursively in the tree. If false, subpackages are shown as first-level objects but not recursively expanded. Default: true
include_descriptionsNoInclude object descriptions in response. Default: true

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

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

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It reveals the return shape (hierarchical tree of names/types/descriptions) but says nothing about read-only safety, permissions, performance cost of deep traversal, or pagination/truncation behavior at max_depth.

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 tight sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and the return shape second. The '[high-level]' tag is slightly noisy but does signal abstraction level without wasting much space.

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?

For a five-parameter traversal tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should do more to explain the return contract and depth/subpackage tradeoffs. It gestures at the return structure but leaves behavioral and routing gaps, making it only minimally adequate.

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 the schema already documents all five parameters including max_depth, include_subpackages, and debug. The description's phrase 'including subpackages and objects' loosely maps to include_subpackages but adds no syntax or format detail 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?

States a specific verb (Retrieve) and resource (complete package tree structure) with scope ('including subpackages and objects'). However, it does not distinguish itself from close siblings like GetPackageContents or GetObjectStructure, which an agent must differentiate on its own.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus GetPackageContents, GetPackage, or the *Low structure variants. The agent is left to infer usage purely from the name and description.

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