Skip to main content
Glama
lingcSun

mcp-bw-adt-api

by lingcSun

bw_datasource_save_and_activate

Save and activate a datasource in SAP BW, optionally creating a transport. Accepts XML from file or inline, and returns a compact summary.

Instructions

One-stop: lock → PUT → (optional) activate → unlock. Prefer xmlPath (from bw_datasource_get_xml + outputPath) over inline xmlContent. When a transport is required: pass transport= OR createTransport=true. Compact projection returned.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
xmlPathNoPath (under the workdir) to a file containing the xml. Takes precedence over xmlContent. Use bw_*_get_xml with outputPath to produce such a file.
transportNo
datasourceYes
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.
xmlContentNoInline xml content. Mutually exclusive with xmlPath.
autoActivateNo
sourceSystemYes
createTransportNo
transportDescriptionNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It reveals the operation sequence, the transport condition, and the compact return projection, which is useful. It does not mention side effects, required permissions, lock scope, or failure behavior, but it does not contradict any structured data.

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 dense, front-loaded sentences: workflow first, then parameter preference, then transport rule. There is no filler and every sentence adds decision-relevant information.

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?

For a 9-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves notable gaps: the meaning/format of datasource and sourceSystem, the default behavior of autoActivate, transportDescription semantics, and what exactly the compact projection contains. It is adequate but not 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 descriptions cover only 3 of 9 parameters (33%), so the description must compensate. It adds meaningful semantics for xmlPath vs xmlContent and the transport/createTransport choice. However, datasource, sourceSystem, autoActivate, and transportDescription remain semantically undocumented.

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 conveys a concrete sequence (lock → PUT → optional activate → unlock) for a datasource save-and-activate operation, which is identifiable from the tool name and parameter names. It does not explicitly contrast with the sibling *_save_and_activate tools, but the resource and workflow are clear.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives actionable guidance: prefer xmlPath produced by bw_datasource_get_xml + outputPath over inline xmlContent, and choose between passing transport=<TRKORR> or createTransport=true when a transport is required. It does not state when to avoid this tool or when a different save/activate sibling would be more appropriate.

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