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

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

UpdateServiceDefinition

Update the source code of an existing ABAP service definition, including locking, unlocking, and optional activation outside batch mode.

Instructions

Update source code of an existing ABAP service definition. Locks, updates, unlocks, and optionally activates. 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": {
      "service_definition_name": "<service_definition_name>",
      "source_code": "<source_code>"
    },
    "name": "UpdateServiceDefinition"
  }
}

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
activateNoActivate service definition after update. Default: true.
source_codeYesComplete service definition source code.
transport_requestNoTransport request number, not a task. Optional if object is local or already in transport.
service_definition_nameYesService definition name. Must exist in the system.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 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 / service_definition_name / description
      Previous value: -"Service definition name (e.g., ZSD_MY_SERVICE). Must exist in the system."New value: +"Service definition name. Must exist in the system."
    • changedInput schema / properties / transport_request / description
      Previous value: -"Transport request number (e.g., E19K905635). Optional if object is local or already in transport."New value: +"Transport request number, not a task. Optional if object is local or already in transport."
  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 full burden and does disclose meaningful behavior: the implicit lock/update/unlock/activate sequence, that activation is optional, and the batch-mode restriction. It omits failure semantics (e.g., what happens if activation fails or the lock cannot be acquired) 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 action and resource, followed by effect and then the batch constraint. No filler or redundancy.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies the essential operational model (lock cycle, optional activation, batch exclusion). The remaining gap is error/rollback behavior and where the activation result is reported, which is not covered anywhere else.

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 coverage is 100%, so all five parameters including activate, transport_request and detail are already documented in the schema. The description adds no additional semantics about these parameters, so the 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 source code of an existing ABAP service definition') and adds the operational effect (lock/update/unlock/activate). It is clearly distinguishable from CreateServiceDefinition, GetServiceDefinition, DeleteServiceDefinition and ActivateServiceDefinition, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Implies usage through 'existing' (object must pre-exist) and 'runs outside batch mode' (excludes BatchBegin-style flows). However it never says when to prefer ActivateServiceDefinition alone, or what to do if the object is already locked, leaving the agent to infer 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