Skip to main content
Glama
lingcSun

mcp-bw-adt-api

by lingcSun
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

bw_dataflow_get

Retrieve the dataflow or lineage graph around an SAP BW object, showing nodes and relations. Specify direction and depth to trace upstream sources or downstream targets, with optional file output for large graphs.

Instructions

Get the dataflow/lineage graph around an object (nodes + relations). levels=-1 expands fully; positive N limits depth. Use outputPath for deep graphs.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
levelsNo-1 = expand to the end (default); N = expand N levels.
directionNoupstream = sources feeding into the object; downstream = where it flows; both (default) = both.
objectNameYes
objectTypeNoDefault ADSO.
outputPathNoIf provided, the full result is written to this path (under the workdir) and the tool returns only a small summary envelope { ok, outputPath, bytes, summary }. Objects/arrays are written as JSON; ONLY the bw_*_get_xml family writes the raw XML string as plain text (that file is directly reusable as xmlPath in a later save call). Other *_get tools (e.g. bw_dtp_get, bw_trfn_get) write the PARSED XML-to-JSON tree, not raw XML — use the matching bw_*_get_xml tool when you need the raw XML string. Use outputPath for large responses (XML, table data, logs, dataflow graphs). When set, tools skip inline pagination/projection so the file contains the complete payload.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, but it only mentions level expansion and suggests outputPath. It does not disclose that outputPath writes a file to the workdir and returns a summary envelope, nor does it describe side effects or safety implications of the tool.

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?

The description is short, front-loaded with the core purpose, and has no filler. It loses a point because the levels and outputPath sentences largely repeat what the input schema already documents.

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?

The tool has 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, so the description must be reasonably complete. It gives the core function and key behavior, but leaves the normal return shape, default direction, and relationship to bw_dataflow_lineage implicit. The schema fills most gaps, making it adequate but not fully complete.

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 description coverage is 80%, so the baseline is 3 even without parameter elaboration in the description. The description's levels sentence restates the schema wording and adds no new meaning, and the outputPath advice duplicates schema guidance.

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 clearly states the action ('Get') and resource ('dataflow/lineage graph') and specifies nodes + relations. However, it does not distinguish this tool from the sibling bw_dataflow_lineage, which appears to overlap in purpose, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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?

Usage is implied: call this when you need a dataflow/lineage graph around an object. It offers parameter-level guidance ('Use outputPath for deep graphs'), but it does not provide explicit when-to-use vs alternatives or exclusions, especially relative to bw_dataflow_lineage.

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