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

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

UpdateLocalMacros

Updates local macros in an ABAP class by managing lock, edit, unlock, and optional parent-class activation outside batch mode.

Instructions

Update local macros in an ABAP class. Manages lock, update, unlock, and optional activation of parent class. 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": {
      "class_name": "<class_name>",
      "macros_code": "<macros_code>"
    },
    "name": "UpdateLocalMacros"
  }
}

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
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

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description does real work: it discloses the internal lock -> update -> unlock sequence, that parent-class activation is optional, and that it is not batch-safe. It omits failure/rollback behavior, permission requirements, and whether an inactive object is left behind when activation is skipped.

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?

Three compact sentences with the resource stated first, then the behavioral lifecycle, then the execution constraint. Nothing is padded, though the batch-mode note could be merged more tightly with the lifecycle sentence.

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 5-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the mechanism but leaves gaps on error handling and what the caller receives back. It is adequate to attempt a call but not to predict its side effects fully.

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 five parameters including the detail enum and transport_request already carry documentation. The description adds nothing parameter-level beyond implying the activation flag exists, which matches the baseline for fully documented schemas.

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 concrete verb+resource (update local macros in an ABAP class), which clearly separates it from the sibling readers/deleters GetLocalMacros and DeleteLocalMacros. It does not explicitly name those siblings, so it stops short of full differentiation.

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?

"Runs outside batch mode" is a real usage constraint that rules out use inside BatchBegin/BatchEnd flows, and the lock/update/unlock mention implies prerequisites are handled internally. However, it never says when to prefer this over UpdateLocalDefinitions/UpdateLocalTypes or what preconditions (inactive objects, transport) must hold.

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