Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
abap-config-mcp

abap-config-mcp

by netweaver1970
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Browse Package

browse_package
Read-onlyIdempotent

List the objects directly inside an ABAP package grouped by object type, optionally including one-level subpackage contents, to explore package structure and contents.

Instructions

List the objects directly inside an ABAP package, grouped by object type, with name and description (at most maxObjects per package). Sub-packages appear as entries of type DEVC/K; includeSubPackages also lists the contents of those one level down. Use it to explore a package; use search_abap_objects to find an object by name across packages. Read-only.

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": {
      "packageName": "<packageName>"
    },
    "name": "browse_package"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
maxObjectsNoMost objects listed per package (default 500); the count of the rest is shown.
packageNameYesPackage name to browse (e.g. ZORDER_API, $TMP for local objects)
connectionIdNoSAP system connection ID
includeSubPackagesNoAlso fetch and display the contents of any sub-packages found (at most 25, one level). Default: false

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.16.2
    • changedInput schema / properties / packageName / description
      Previous value: -"Package name to browse (e.g. ZCAR_MM, $TMP)"New value: +"Package name to browse (e.g. ZORDER_API, $TMP for local objects)"
  2. First observedv1.16.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the closing "Read-only" is largely redundant. The description does add real behavior: results are grouped by object type, sub-packages surface as DEVC/K entries, includeSubPackages recurses only one level, and truncation at maxObjects shows the count of the rest — useful disclosure the annotations do not carry.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope, then sub-package behavior, then a routing sentence to the sibling. Little waste; the trailing "Read-only" is the only redundant clause against the annotations.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by describing the result shape: objects grouped by type with name and description, sub-packages as DEVC/K entries, and truncation counts. It leaves open details like total counts of sub-packages beyond the 25 cap or ordering, but an agent has enough to invoke it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema for maxObjects (a cap per package, with the remainder counted) and includeSubPackages (one level down, and that sub-packages appear as DEVC/K entries even without recursion). It does not add anything for connectionId or packageName, which the schema already covers.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource ("List the objects directly inside an ABAP package") and adds the return shape (grouped by object type, with name and description). It explicitly contrasts with search_abap_objects, which looks up objects by name across packages, 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 Guidelines4/5

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

It gives an explicit when-to-use ("explore a package") and names the alternative (search_abap_objects) with the condition that selects it. The gap is that no when-not-to-use case beyond that single alternative is given, e.g. how it compares to describe_database_table-style lookups or deeper-package navigation.

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