Skip to main content
Glama
MCP SAP GUI Server

MCP SAP GUI Server

by kts982

Sap Get Alv Toolbar

sap_get_alv_toolbar
Read-only

Retrieve all toolbar buttons from an ALV grid to discover available actions before pressing them with sap_press_alv_toolbar_button; returns button IDs, texts, and types.

Instructions

Get all toolbar buttons from an ALV grid.

Returns button IDs, texts, and types. Use this to discover available actions (sort, filter, export, etc.) before pressing them with sap_press_alv_toolbar_button. Only works on GuiGridView (ALV), not GuiTableControl.

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": {
      "grid_id": "<grid_id>"
    },
    "name": "sap_get_alv_toolbar"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
grid_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description need only add context beyond that, which it does: it names the returned fields (IDs, texts, types) and a real structural limitation (fails on GuiTableControl grids). It does not cover error behavior or what happens with an invalid/unknown grid_id, so it falls short of a 5.

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, no filler, with the purpose, return shape, and constraint ordered front to back. Every sentence adds information.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be spelled out, and the description still sketches them briefly. The grid-type constraint is valuable, but the one required input's origin is left unexplained, which is the only real completeness gap.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% and the single parameter grid_id is never mentioned in the description – not where to obtain it, not whether it is a session-local handle or a screen identifier. With the schema carrying no semantics at all, the description should compensate and does not.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get all toolbar buttons from an ALV grid') and immediately bounds the scope with a component-type constraint (GuiGridView only, not GuiTableControl). An agent can distinguish it from sap_press_alv_toolbar_button and other table tools without reading the schema.

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?

Gives an explicit workflow: discover actions here first, then press them with sap_press_alv_toolbar_button. It also states the exclusion condition ('Only works on GuiGridView (ALV), not GuiTableControl'), which tells the agent when this tool will fail.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.