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

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

UpdateLocalTypes

Updates local type definitions in an ABAP class while managing lock, edit, unlock, and optional parent class activation.

Instructions

Update local types definitions 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>",
      "local_types_code": "<local_types_code>"
    },
    "name": "UpdateLocalTypes"
  }
}

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.
local_types_codeYesUpdated source code for local types.
transport_requestNoTransport request number (required for transportable objects), not a task.
activate_on_updateNoActivate parent class after updating local types. 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 types. 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

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 the full burden, and it does disclose real behavior: it manages lock/update/unlock internally and can optionally activate the parent class. That is meaningful operational context an agent can't get from the schema. It stops short of failure/rollback semantics (e.g. what happens if update succeeds but activation fails) and permission requirements.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, then lock/activation behavior, then the batch-mode constraint. No filler and nothing buried.

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 covers locking and activation but omits error/rollback behavior, whether the code replaces or merges existing local types, and what the response contains. Adequate but with a clear gap for a destructive-in-effect write operation.

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 detail, transport_request and activate_on_update are already documented. The description adds only a light echo of the activation behavior ('optional activation of parent class'), so baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Update local types definitions in an ABAP class.' The resource is precise and distinguishes it from GetLocalTypes/DeleteLocalTypes by verb, but it never names those siblings or clarifies how it differs from UpdateLocalDefinitions/UpdateLocalMacros, so routing still requires inference.

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?

The only usage condition given is implicit: 'Runs outside batch mode,' which tells the agent this cannot be invoked inside a batch session. There is no explicit when-to-use versus GetLocalTypes (read) or the other UpdateLocal* tools, and no prerequisite guidance such as lock ownership or transport requirements.

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