abap-config-mcp

List Articles into Assortments (Retail)

retail_listing

Idempotent

Lists articles into SAP retail assortments using the standard listing engine, extending them to assigned sites and creating WLK1 conditions; runs as a dry run by default, with commit:true to execute.

Instructions

List one or more articles into retail assortments via SAP's standard listing engine (EXECUTE_LISTING_ART_ASSORT_RFC, determine_data=X). Listing EXTENDS each article to the assortment's assigned sites (creating the plant/valuation segments) and writes the WLK1 listing conditions, so the article becomes available at those sites. Listing into a GENERAL assortment propagates to all its assigned sites (incl. their local assortments).

DRY RUN by default — returns the prepared listing items. Set commit: true to execute. dateFrom/dateTo default to today / 9999-12-31. Material numbers are ALPHA-padded automatically.

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": {
      "items": "<items>"
    },
    "name": "retail_listing"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`items`	Yes	Article→assortment listing items, e.g. [{ product: "151", assortment: "BE_STD" }].
`commit`	No	Actually list (default: false = dry run returning the prepared items)
`icfPath`	No	SICF path of the engine (default: /sap/bc/zmcp_cust)
`autoDeploy`	No	Auto-deploy/update the engine class if missing or outdated (default: true)
`connectionId`	No	SAP system connection ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.16.0Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations, it discloses the write semantics that matter: listing extends articles to assigned sites and writes WLK1 conditions, and GENERAL assortments propagate to local assortments. The dry-run default is the most valuable disclosure for a mutating call; gaps remain around error/partial-failure behavior on batch items.

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?

Front-loads the action and the dry-run warning, and each sentence carries operational content rather than filler. It is dense and parentheses-heavy, but nothing is wasted.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description explains what a dry run returns ('the prepared listing items'), which covers the return-value gap. Minor omissions of the connection/engine-administration parameters are acceptable given their documented schema entries.

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 commit, dateFrom/dateTo defaults and ALPHA padding are already documented in the schema and the description largely restates them. It adds no meaning about icfPath, autoDeploy or connectionId, so the baseline 3 is the right ceiling.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List one or more articles into retail assortments'), names the underlying engine (EXECUTE_LISTING_ART_ASSORT_RFC) and the concrete artifacts it produces (plant/valuation segments, WLK1 conditions). An agent knows exactly what business outcome this produces.

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?

Gives a clear operating mode: dry run by default, set commit: true to execute, and explains the GENERAL assortment propagation case so the agent can predict scope. It lacks explicit 'when not to use' or comparison to any alternative, which keeps it below 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