Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
abap-mcp

abap-mcp

by jackxiong11894
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

List abaplint rules

list_abap_rules
Read-onlyIdempotent

List abaplint rules, filtering by query or tag. Get rule details and documentation links to decide which checks to enable.

Instructions

List the abaplint rules this server can check, optionally filtered by a free-text query or a tag, returning key, title, one-line description, tags and a documentation URL per rule. Use this when deciding which rules to enable or override in lint_abap, or to discover what a Clean-ABAP-style check exists for. It does not run any analysis and does not change configuration — it is a read-only catalog. Example: list_abap_rules({ "query": "obsolete" }).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_abap_rules"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tagNoFilter by abaplint tag, e.g. "Styleguide", "Security", "Performance", "Quickfix", "SingleFile".
queryNoCase-insensitive substring matched against rule key, title and description, e.g. "select" or "obsolete".

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countYesNumber of rules returned.
rulesYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.8

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds further transparency: it is a 'read-only catalog' that does not run analysis or alter configuration. It also describes the optional filtering behavior (free-text query or tag) and the example call. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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?

The description is tightly packed: first the action, then when-to-use, then safety/exclusion, then an example. Every sentence earns its place, with no fluff or repetition of schema field names. It is front-loaded and concise for the level of detail provided.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has an output schema (though not shown), the description already mentions return fields. Both parameters are covered, usage guidance is explicit, and safety behavior is disclosed. For a read-only listing tool, this is fully complete—an agent can confidently select and invoke it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description enriches param understanding by explaining 'tag' as an abaplint tag with examples and 'query' as a case-insensitive substring matched against specific fields. It also provides a concrete invocation example, which is more than the schema alone. This meaningfully aids correct parameter usage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with the specific verb+resource: 'List the abaplint rules this server can check'. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like lint_abap (which runs checks) and explain_abap_rule (which explains a single rule). It also enumerates the return fields (key, title, one-line description, tags, documentation URL), leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly states when to use: 'Use this when deciding which rules to enable or override in lint_abap, or to discover what a Clean-ABAP-style check exists for.' It also says what it does not do: 'It does not run any analysis and does not change configuration', which clarifies when not to use it (e.g., for actually running linting). Sibling tool lint_abap is named as the alternative.

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