Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP SAP GUI Server

MCP SAP GUI Server

by kts982
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Sap Get Current Cell

sap_get_current_cell
Read-only

Retrieve the currently focused cell position in an SAP ALV grid or table control to identify the active user cursor.

Instructions

Get the currently focused cell position in an ALV grid or table control.

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": {
      "table_id": "<table_id>"
    },
    "name": "sap_get_current_cell"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
table_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds the useful nuance that this reports focus state rather than generic cell data, but says nothing about behavior before focus exists or what happens with an invalid table_id.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized, though the brevity contributes to the missing parameter and usage detail.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, for a tool with an undocumented required parameter in a dense sibling family, the description leaves the identifier semantics and alternative-selection guidance unresolved.

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 coverage is 0% — table_id is entirely undocumented. The description does not clarify what table_id refers to (ALV grid vs table control identifier), how to obtain it, or whether it is required to match an existing focused element, so it fails to compensate for the schema gap.

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?

The description gives a specific verb and resource ('get the currently focused cell position') and scopes it to ALV grids or table controls. It is clear what it does, but it doesn't distinguish itself from near-siblings like sap_get_cell_info or sap_get_table_control_row_info.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no statement of when to use this versus sap_get_cell_info, sap_set_current_cell, or sap_get_table_control_row_info. The only context is the implied 'currently focused' framing, leaving the agent to infer selection criteria.

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