Skip to main content
Glama
lingcSun

mcp-bw-adt-api

by lingcSun
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

bw_trfn_class_save_source

Save and activate the ABAP class source for a transformation routine, using a file path or inline content. Specify the routine ID and optionally disable activation.

Instructions

Save+activate the routine's ABAP class source. Prefer sourcePath over inline sourceContent.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
transportNo
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.
sourcePathNoPath (under the workdir) to a file containing the source. Takes precedence over sourceContent. Use bw_*_get_xml with outputPath to produce such a file.
sourceContentNoInline source content. Mutually exclusive with sourcePath.
transportDescriptionNo
activateTransformationNoDefault true.

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?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states 'Save+activate' but does not explain side effects such as overwriting existing source, transport request handling, activation consequences, or required permissions. The sourcePath preference is input guidance, not behavioral context.

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?

The description is 16 words, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no filler. The sourcePath preference earns its place as the most important usage note.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

This is a 7-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and no annotations. The description is too sparse to explain return behavior, transport implications, activation side effects, or how this tool relates to sibling save/check/get tools. An agent invoking it correctly would need to rely mostly on the input schema and tool name.

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 coverage is 57%, leaving id, transport, and transportDescription without descriptions. The tool description adds only a sourcePath-vs-sourceContent preference and does not compensate for the undocumented parameters. It provides some marginal meaning but not enough to fully clarify the parameter set.

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 names a specific action ('Save+activate') and a specific resource ('routine's ABAP class source'), which is clear and not tautological. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from closely related siblings like bw_trfn_save_and_activate or bw_trfn_class_source.

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?

The description gives useful input guidance: 'Prefer sourcePath over inline sourceContent.' This implies when one parameter should be used over the other, but it does not say when to choose this tool over alternatives or when save+activate is appropriate versus check, get_xml, or a plain save.

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