Skip to main content
Glama
fr0ster

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

UpdateLocalMacros

Update local macros in an ABAP class, managing lock, update, unlock, and optional activation of the parent class.

Instructions

Update local macros in an ABAP class. Manages lock, update, unlock, and optional activation of parent class.

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
class_nameYesParent class name.
macros_codeYesUpdated source code for local macros.
transport_requestNoTransport request number (required for transportable objects), not a task.
activate_on_updateNoActivate parent class after updating local macros. Default: false

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv16.0.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / activate_on_update / description
      Previous value: -"Activate parent class after updating. Default: false"New value: +"Activate parent class after updating local macros. Default: false"
    • changedInput schema / properties / class_name / description
      Previous value: -"Parent class name (e.g., ZCL_MY_CLASS)."New value: +"Parent class name."
    • 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 / transport_request / description
      Previous value: -"Transport request number."New value: +"Transport request number (required for transportable objects), not a task."
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. The second sentence usefully discloses the lock/update/unlock lifecycle and that activation of the parent class is optional, which is real context beyond the schema. It does not cover permissions, transport handling implications, or failure/rollback behavior for this mutation.

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 with zero filler, and the core action is front-loaded before the behavioral note. Every clause earns its place.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is adequate but thin: it omits transport requirements tied to the transport_request parameter, error/rollback semantics, and what the update returns. The lock-lifecycle note is the one piece of genuinely helpful completeness.

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 the enum values for 'detail' and the meaning of 'activate_on_update'. The description adds no syntax, format, or constraint detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 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 states a specific verb+resource: 'Update local macros in an ABAP class.' The resource (macros) is distinct from the nearest siblings UpdateLocalTypes, UpdateLocalDefinitions, and UpdateLocalTestClass, so an agent can tell them apart. It does not explicitly name or contrast against those siblings, keeping it below 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 Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no routing to alternatives. The agent is left to infer that this is the mutation counterpart to GetLocalMacros/DeleteLocalMacros purely from the name pattern shared by ~150 siblings.

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