Skip to main content
Glama
fr0ster

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

UpdateDataElement

Update an existing ABAP data element: lock, replace its definition with new parameters, unlock, and optionally activate.

Instructions

Update an existing ABAP data element. Locks, updates with provided parameters (complete replacement), unlocks, and optionally activates.

Input Schema

TableJSON 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
lengthNoLength - for predefinedAbapType or refToPredefinedAbapType
activateNoActivate data element after update (default: true)
decimalsNoDecimals - for predefinedAbapType or refToPredefinedAbapType
data_typeNoData type (CHAR, NUMC, etc.) - for predefinedAbapType or refToPredefinedAbapType
type_kindNoType kind: domain, predefinedAbapType, refToPredefinedAbapType, refToDictionaryType, refToClifTypedomain
type_nameNoType name: domain name, data element name, or class name (depending on type_kind)
descriptionNoNew data element description
search_helpNoSearch help name
package_nameYesPackage name
field_label_longNoLong field label (max 40 chars)
data_element_nameYesData element name to update
field_label_shortNoShort field label (max 10 chars)
set_get_parameterNoSet/Get parameter ID
transport_requestNoTransport request number, not a task. Required for transportable packages.
field_label_mediumNoMedium field label (max 20 chars)
field_label_headingNoHeading field label (max 55 chars)
search_help_parameterNoSearch help parameter

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv16.0.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / data_element_name / description
      Previous value: -"Data element name to update (e.g., ZZ_TEST_DTEL_01)"New value: +"Data element name to update"
    • 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., ZOK_LOCAL, $TMP for local objects)"New value: +"Package name"
    • changedInput schema / properties / transport_request / description
      Previous value: -"Transport request number (e.g., E19K905635). Required for transportable packages."New value: +"Transport request number, not a task. Required for transportable packages."
  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, the description carries full behavioral disclosure and does well by naming locking, complete replacement of parameters, unlocking, and optional activation. It omits permission/transport prerequisites (covered in schema) and error behavior, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose then behavior. No filler; every clause ('locks', 'complete replacement', 'optionally activates') earns its place and directly informs the caller.

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?

For a mutation tool with 18 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description provides the key behavioral traits. It could mention transport request requirements or authorization needs, but the schema covers transport_request and there is no return value to explain.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the phrase 'complete replacement' adds critical semantics: provided parameters replace the existing definition rather than patching it. This meaning is not present in the schema and is essential for correct invocation.

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 (Update) and resource (ABAP data element), and clarifies it must already exist. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like CreateDataElement or ActivateDataElement, but the name and 'existing' qualifier make the scope largely unambiguous.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as CreateDataElement, ActivateDataElement, or DeleteDataElement. Usage is only implied by 'Update an existing ABAP data element' and the tool name, leaving the agent to infer prerequisites and 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