Skip to main content
Glama
fr0ster

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

UpdateMetadataExtension

Replace the source code of an existing ABAP Metadata Extension (DDLX), locking, unlocking, and optionally activating it after the update.

Instructions

Update source code of an existing ABAP Metadata Extension (DDLX). Locks, updates, unlocks, and optionally activates.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesMetadata Extension name
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
activateNoActivate after update. Default: true
lock_handleNoLock handle from LockObject. If not provided, will attempt to lock internally.
source_codeYesNew source code
transport_requestNoTransport request number (required for transportable packages), not a task.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 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 / transport_request / description
      Previous value: -"Transport request number (required for transportable packages)."New value: +"Transport request number (required for transportable packages), not a task."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / transport_request
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Transport request number (required for transportable packages).",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does usefully disclose the lifecycle ('Locks, updates, unlocks, and optionally activates'), which tells the agent this is a mutating, lock-acquiring operation. However, it omits permissions/auth needs, lock-conflict behavior, failure/rollback semantics, and transport implications that matter for a write operation.

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 tightly packed sentences with no filler; the purpose is front-loaded and the behavioral summary follows immediately. 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 6-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the core lifecycle but leaves gaps around locking workflow (lock_handle vs internal lock), transport requirements, and error behavior. The rich schema offsets some of this, making it adequate but not complete.

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 six parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds only the vague 'optionally activates' mapping to the activate param and no syntax/format detail, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 source code of an existing ABAP Metadata Extension (DDLX)', which clearly separates it from Create/Delete/Get/CheckMetadataExtension siblings by name. It does not explicitly call out those siblings, but the purpose 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 only implied — the tool updates an existing DDLX, and the phrase 'optionally activates' hints at the activate flag. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance, no mention of prerequisites (transport_request for transportable packages), and no routing to alternatives.

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