Skip to main content
Glama
fr0ster

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

UpdateDomain

Modify an existing ABAP domain by locking, replacing all parameters, unlocking, and optionally activating it.

Instructions

Update an existing ABAP domain. 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
lengthNoField length (max depends on datatype)
activateNoActivate domain after update (default: true)
datatypeNoData type: CHAR, NUMC, DATS, TIMS, DEC, INT1, INT2, INT4, INT8, CURR, QUAN, etc.
decimalsNoDecimal places (for DEC, CURR, QUAN types)
lowercaseNoAllow lowercase input
descriptionNoNew domain description (optional)
domain_nameYesDomain name to update
sign_existsNoField has sign (+/-)
value_tableNoValue table name for foreign key relationship
fixed_valuesNoArray of fixed values for domain value range
package_nameYesPackage name
conversion_exitNoConversion exit routine name (without CONVERSION_EXIT_ prefix)
transport_requestNoTransport request number, not a task. Required for transportable packages.

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"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / domain_name / description
      Previous value: -"Domain name to update (e.g., ZZ_TEST_0001)"New value: +"Domain name to update"
    • 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

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses the full procedure (lock, update, unlock, optional activate) and the critical semantic that updates are a complete replacement rather than a merge. It omits auth/permission requirements and lock-contention or failure 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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the operation and scope, followed by the exact read-modify-write lifecycle. No wasted words.

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 14-param mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies the essential behavioral contract (destructive replacement + activation). It could say more about activation failure or transport implications, but an agent has enough to call it correctly, and the schema covers the parameters.

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 all 14 parameters are already documented; the baseline is 3. The description adds only the "complete replacement" framing, which matters for parameter behavior but is not tied to any specific field.

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 + resource ("Update an existing ABAP domain") that clearly distinguishes it from siblings like CreateDomain, GetDomain, and DeleteDomain. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the operation is unambiguous.

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 by "existing" (not for creation) and by the note that parameters are a "complete replacement," which warns against partial updates. However, there is no explicit when-to-use vs. ActivateDomain/CheckDomain guidance or prerequisite statement, so routing relies on inference.

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