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

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

GetUnitTestResult

Reads the result of an ABAP Unit test run by run_id, waiting within a bounded time for runs still in progress; returns terse, full, or raw detail.

Instructions

[read-only] Reads the result of the ABAP Unit test run named by run_id, for a run still running when its start answered. Waits for it within a bound. Runs outside batch mode.

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": {
      "run_id": "<run_id>"
    },
    "name": "GetUnitTestResult"
  }
}

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
run_idYesRun id a unit test run answered.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 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"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / format
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Result format: abapunit or junit.",
-  "enum": [
-    "abapunit",
-    "junit"
-  ],
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • changedInput schema / properties / run_id / description
      Previous value: -"Run identifier returned by unit test run."New value: +"Run id a unit test run answered."
    • removedInput schema / properties / with_navigation_uris
      Removed value: -{
-  "default": false,
-  "description": "Include navigation URIs in result if supported.",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool is read-only, waits within a bound, and runs outside batch mode, which is useful. But 'within a bound' is unspecified, 'outside batch mode' is unexplained, and timeout/error behavior is not described.

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?

The description is three short sentences and front-loads the core action and scenario. The phrase 'for a run still running when its start answered' is slightly convoluted, and 'Runs outside batch mode' is isolated without explanation, but there is no filler.

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?

There are no annotations and no output schema, so the description should carry more. It explains the trigger scenario and wait behavior, but does not describe what the 'result' actually includes (e.g. pass/fail details) beyond the detail enum, nor the timeout bound.

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%, and the schema itself documents both run_id and the detail enum with clear descriptions. The tool description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is 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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Reads the result of the ABAP Unit test run named by run_id.' It also clarifies the scenario ('for a run still running when its start answered'), which distinguishes it from synchronous result retrieval. However, it does not explicitly name the sibling tool (e.g. RunUnitTest) that produces the run_id.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives clear usage context: call this for a run that was still running when the start call returned, and expect it to wait. It does not name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, so it stops short of the top score.

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