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

abap-config-mcp

by netweaver1970
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Describe Customizing Object

customizing_describe
Read-onlyIdempotent

Describe SAP customizing views or tables to see base table, key fields, delivery class, authorization group, maintenance program, and foreign-key references before reading or changing configuration.

Instructions

Describe a SAP customizing view or table: underlying base table, all fields with key markers, delivery class (transport behaviour), authorization group (S_TABU_DIS), maintenance program, and foreign-key references on key fields (org-unit candidates). Use after img_search to understand the structure before reading or changing config.

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": {
      "objectName": "<objectName>"
    },
    "name": "customizing_describe"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
languageNoLanguage key for descriptions (default: E)
objectNameYesMaintenance view or table name (e.g. V_T001W, T001W, V_T001, TVKO)
connectionIdNoSAP system connection ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.16.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real substance by explaining what metadata is exposed and why it matters (delivery class = transport behaviour, authorization group = S_TABU_DIS check, foreign keys = org-unit candidates), though it says nothing about error behavior or missing objects.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the verb and the returned fields, and the second sentence gives usage context. The enumeration in sentence one is dense but each item conveys distinct output information, so little is wasted.

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

Completeness5/5

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

There is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of describing return values — and it does so field by field, including semantic interpretation of each. With parameters fully documented in the schema and annotations covering safety, an agent has everything needed to select and call it.

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 100%, so objectName, language, and connectionId are already documented inline with examples. The description does not add format or naming conventions beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 verb (Describe) and resource (SAP customizing view or table) and enumerates exactly what is returned: base table, key-marked fields, delivery class, authorization group, maintenance program, and foreign-key references. It is highly specific but never distinguishes itself from the sibling describe_database_table, whose scope could plausibly overlap.

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 clear context: 'Use after img_search to understand the structure before reading or changing config,' which ties the tool to the customizing_read/plan_change/apply sequence. There is no explicit when-not guidance or named exclusion versus describe_database_table, so it falls short of a 5.

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