Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP SAP GUI Server

MCP SAP GUI Server

by kts982
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Sap Get Toolbar Buttons

sap_get_toolbar_buttons
Read-only

Lists button IDs, text, tooltips, and enabled states for standard SAP system and application toolbars, excluding ALV toolbars, to support GUI automation.

Instructions

List all buttons on the system toolbar (tbar[0]) and app toolbar (tbar[1]).

Returns button IDs, text, tooltip, and enabled state. This is for standard SAP toolbars, NOT ALV (use sap_get_alv_toolbar for ALV).

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": "sap_get_toolbar_buttons"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
window_idNownd[0]

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful scoping detail (which toolbar indices are read and that it's the standard toolbar rather than ALV), but it repeats return fields that the output schema already documents and says nothing about behavior when no toolbar exists or about pagination/size limits.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the operation and the toolbar indices, followed by the return fields and the ALV exclusion. No filler; only the return-field sentence is arguably redundant given the output schema.

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?

The tool is simple (one optional param, read-only, output schema present), and the description covers scope, target structures, and the ALV boundary. The one gap is the unexplained window_id parameter, which is the only thing absent from an otherwise sufficient definition.

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?

There is one parameter, window_id, and schema description coverage is 0% – the description never mentions it, explain its 'wnd[0]' default, or how it relates to the tbar[0]/tbar[1] indices it describes. With low coverage the description is expected to compensate and it 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 ('List all buttons on the system toolbar... and app toolbar') and concretely identifies the structures involved (tbar[0], tbar[1]). It also explicitly demarcates itself from the nearest sibling, sap_get_alv_toolbar, so an agent can distinguish the two without opening either 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 negative routing rule: 'This is for standard SAP toolbars, NOT ALV (use sap_get_alv_toolbar for ALV).' That names the alternative and the condition that selects it, leaving nothing for the agent to infer about which of the two toolbar tools applies.

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