NewABAP, RAP and ABAP Cloud
In the last 90 days
39 changes
Today
Agent access to your codecoverage by ecosystem, coverage by flavor revisedReassessed against the graph (check:capabilities): removed the tool count and the two absence claims about who has built something.Agent access to your code
Agent evalscore coverage, coverage by ecosystem revisedReassessed against the graph (check:capabilities): albertmink-agentic-abap-evals, an independent set of ABAP tasks and a grader for coding agents, was entered after the block was written; the count is dropped and the second kind named. State unchanged.Agent evals
Agent guidancecoverage by ecosystem, coverage by flavor revisedReassessed against the graph (check:capabilities): docs/WRITING.md §3 rules out provider counts and absence claims in every capability field.Agent guidance
LLM integrationcoverage by ecosystem, core coverage, coverage by flavor revisedReassessed against the graph (check:capabilities): the note claimed who provides the capability behind this flavor, which moves with the corpus. The flavor state is unchanged.LLM integration
Show 2 more
Retrieval-augmented generationcoverage by ecosystem, core coverage revisedReassessed against the graph (check:capabilities): a CAP-door provider reaches Document Grounding through the LangChain vector store interface, a shape the two plugins do not cover.Retrieval-augmented generation
Tool governancedescription, core coverage, coverage by ecosystem, framing by ecosystem, coverage by flavor revisedReassessed against the graph (check:capabilities): a count of providers removed.Tool governance
Yesterday
Agent access to your codecoverage by ecosystem revisedRewritten at the maintainer's request (2026-10-25): what SAP ships named whole, and what the community adds written from what its ABAP MCP servers state about how they run, connect and sign in.Agent access to your code
Sat 17
Agent access to your systemsdescription revisedKeep the default capability wording neutral; preserve the previous wording in framing_by_ecosystem.cap. Maintainer-requested scope audit.Agent access to your systems
Thu 15
Agent access to your codeframing by ecosystem revisedBeside Agent access to your systems, the ABAP door read as two names for one thing. This one is about the code, development objects reached through ADT; that one is about business data and operations. The atlas maintainer's decision.Agent access to your code
Agent evalscore coverage, coverage by flavor, facets, gap revisedThe note rested on "everyone" and "nobody", which nothing here sources. The replacement says what the material read on the three doors covers and what it leaves to the project, which is checkable.Agent evals
Agent guidancecoverage by ecosystem, framing by ecosystem, facets, coverage by flavor, framing by flavor revisedskillOverflowDanKromp/skillOverflowA collection of 41 agent skills, 37 for CAP, Fiori, BTP, UI5, ABAP, Integration Suite and HANA work and four for creating, reviewing and retiring skills, each with its own eval.independent, cap entered on 2026-09-18, after this flavor was assessed, serves the UI5 door and states no flavor, so by the flavor rule it answers in all of them. Its own skill list names SAPUI5 data binding, custom controls, i18n and testing and nothing about the component library, so it is reported as a fallback rather than read as a community presence here. Saying so is what keeps core-only honest beside the options the page lists.Agent guidance
LLM integrationcore coverage, coverage by flavor, framing by flavor, facets revisedTwo questions the options here answer differently and the page could not show. Which models an option reaches is the first fact a reader needs, because all but one of the CAP options are clients of SAP AI Core; whether the response can be streamed decides whether a chat surface is possible at all. Both are scoped to cap: the ABAP, UI5 and BTP options were not read for them in this pass.LLM integration
Wed 14
Agent access to your codenormative relevance revisedThe policy's agentic provision reaches every server that calls ADT for an agent; it was stated on arc-1 alone and as unsourced prose in several boundaries.Agent access to your code
LLM integrationcoverage by flavor revisedThe PromptInput page no longer carries the sentence this rested on. Read again on 2026-10-14 it states "The @ui5/webcomponents-ai package is under development and considered experimental - components' APIs are subject to change. Furthermore, the package supports Horizon themes only", with no version marker in it. The since-2.0 claim had no second source, so it goes rather than stand unsourced; the experimental state and the Horizon-only limit stay, in the words the page now uses, which are the words coverage_by_ecosystem.ui5 already quoted. The flavor's own assessment of who provides it was not redone, so assessed_at stands.LLM integration
Mon 12
Agent access to your systemscore coverage, coverage by ecosystem, description revisedMaintainer requested complementary boundaries so a CAP bridge can connect system access and application MCP exposure, while implementation restrictions remain explicit. Domains, providers and task classifications are unchanged.Agent access to your systems
Fri 9
Agent access to your systemsentry revisedSplit out of MCP servers at the maintainer's decision. That capability named a protocol and carried two concerns: exposing what you built to agents, which stays there under a name that says so, and giving agents a way into an SAP system you run, which is this one. Thirty providers moved with their own sentences; the Commerce and SuccessFactors slots moved with them. Named beside agent access to your code, its development-time sibling.Agent access to your systems
Agent guidanceecosystems revisedSAP Commerce opened as a product door (docs/concepts/product-doors.md, ADR-0033) and sap-commerce-skillsap-commerce-skillAn agent skill for SAP Commerce Cloud 2211-jdk21.1 and later: 21 reference guides, 58 code templates and three shell scripts, installed through the skills CLI.independent, commerce entered behind it with no tile to sit under. Packaged knowledge for the Commerce type system, service layer, ImpEx and OCC API is the same concern the node already holds on four doors, so the key was added rather than the capability forked.Agent guidance
Sun 27
Retrieval-augmented generationcore coverage revisedcapire audit 2026-09-27, link-only pages read a fourth time: vector embeddings are one of the three things SAP frames as CAP's native AI support, in the one sentence the section's index says of its own.Retrieval-augmented generation
Fri 25
Agent evalsecosystems revisedLLM-Benchmark-ABAP-Code-GenerationLLM-Benchmark-ABAP-Code-GenerationA benchmark that has a model write ABAP for 180 tasks ten times each, then feeds the SAP system's own syntax check, activation and ABAP Unit results back for up to five correction rounds.independent, abap, proposed in the same batch, measures generated ABAP across models by creating each class in an SAP system and reading its syntax check, activation and unit-test result. The concern is one an ABAP developer decides behind their own door, and the door had no tile for it to appear under.Agent evals
Mon 21
Retrieval-augmented generationcore coverage revisedWith the core's half now stated, the panel needed the sentence that says what is added on top of it, and the two shapes differ: one retrieval method behind a service binding, or a vector table modelled on an annotated entity.Retrieval-augmented generation
Sun 20
Agent evalscore coverage revisedTwo independent artifacts provide this capability on CAP beside capire/skills: @saptarishi/cds-plugin-llm and DanKromp/skillOverflow, both entered on 2026-09-18, after the core-only reading.Agent evals
LLM integrationcore coverage revisedThe boundary is kept and made checkable against capire's new AI pages: aicore is documented as the default kind for production and hybrid, and every other documented kind (auto and mock on Node.js, ollama and mocked on Java) is for local runs.LLM integration
Retrieval-augmented generationcore coverage revisedcapire's Vector Embeddings guide documents embedding on write as a stored calculated element, so the old sentence, which listed embedding on write among what every entry writes by hand, no longer held. The state is unchanged: no SAP artifact in the graph carries a provides edge to this capability behind the CAP door.Retrieval-augmented generation
Thu 17
Retrieval-augmented generationentry revisedCompleted the intended consolidation: retained CAP framing, ABAP and HANA coverage, the detailed BTP document-grounding coverage and framing, and scoped normative relevance. Repointed relationships and retired the duplicate capability.Retrieval-augmented generation
Tue 15
Agent access to your codecoverage by ecosystem, framing by ecosystem, coverage by flavor, framing by flavor revisedThe HTTP resources the flavor is restricted to now have a page.Agent access to your code
Mon 14
Agent access to your codecoverage by flavor, framing by flavor revisedThe UI5-door providers of this capability — @ui5/mcp-server@ui5/mcp-serverSAP's MCP server for UI5 development: ten tools that scaffold an app or a card, read the project in front of the agent, and run the linter and the manifest validator against it.sap official, ui5 and fiori-mcp@sap-ux/fiori-mcp-serverSAP's Fiori MCP server, run as fiori-mcp, letting a coding assistant create and edit Fiori applications directly rather than describing the steps.sap official, ui5 — state freestyle and fiori-elements, never web-components. SAP's @ui5/webcomponents-mcp-server@ui5/webcomponents-mcp-serverFour tools that answer an agent's questions about UI5 Web Components from the framework's own documentation — component API, integration guides, and the docs themselves.sap official, ui5 does carry the web-components flavor but provides documentationDocumentationFinding the answer in what has already been written, and writing it where it has not — first-party documentation made searchable by something other than a person scrolling it, including by an agent, and a document of custom code produced from the code itself.SAP and community, unassessed, not this capability: its four tools serve the library's own API and guides and never open the project in front of the agent. No provider states web-components for agent-code-access, and the concern itself is not structurally absent from the flavor, so unmapped reads truer than not-applicable.Agent access to your code
Agent evalsdescription, ecosystems, core coverage revisedThe validator now rejects an unmapped reading on a door with its own providers, and capire/skills (SAP-official) provides this capability.Agent evals
Agent guidancecoverage by flavor, framing by flavor revisedThe door-level framing already says the Web Components skills ship inside the library and version with it; a flavor paragraph names the two skills the flavor's provider actually carries rather than repeating the door's sentence.Agent guidance
LLM integrationecosystems, coverage by flavor, framing by flavor, coverage by ecosystem, description revisedThe description named a CAP service, which is false on the UI5, BTP and ABAP doors this capability is in. Only the subject of the call changed.LLM integration
Show 2 more
Retrieval-augmented generationid, ecosystems revisedSAP AI Core's Document Grounding is the same concern, answering from your own documents instead of from what a model remembers, in a managed form on the BTP door; the CDS in the name is the CAP door's version of it.Retrieval-augmented generation
Tool governancecore coverage, coverage by flavor revisedSuperClaude for SAP's own flavors entry states abap-cloud with the identical quote it states standard-abap with, and its README describes no guard behaviour that differs between the two, so the ABAP door's community-only reading carries over to the flavor. The concern is not classic-only — unlike SAP GUI screens or unreleased objects, which system to call is a question ABAP Cloud is asked too — so not-applicable does not fit, and the validator forbids it on a flavor a stated provider covers.Tool governance
Sat 12
Tool governancecoverage by ecosystem revisedSAP Integration Suite entered the corpus with a tool-governance edge, so community-only was no longer a true reading of the door. The evidence sentence that was in where_it_stops describes the community skill and moved to community_adds, where the core's own boundary can be stated.Tool governance
Thu 10
Agent guidanceecosystems revisedArtifacts that answer this concern sat behind the ABAP door with no tile to appear under, so browse counted them and rendered nothing. The concern is one a ABAP developer actually decides there, which is the test for opening a door rather than trimming a serves claim.Agent guidance
LLM integrationecosystems revisedArtifacts that answer this concern sat behind the UI5 door with no tile to appear under, so browse counted them and rendered nothing. The concern is one a UI5 developer actually decides there, which is the test for opening a door rather than trimming a serves claim.LLM integration
Tool governanceecosystems, description revisedThe first clause said "which CAP services", which was true when CAP was the only door. Governing what an agent may call is the concern; which CAP services is one ecosystem's version of it.Tool governance
Wed 9
Agent access to your codeid, ecosystems revisedAn SAP-published MCP server entered from the sap-ai-mcp-servers catalogue answers this concern on the BTP door, and the door had no tile for it to sit under.Agent access to your code
Agent guidancedescription, ecosystems revisedThe cross-ecosystem sentence said "writes correct CAP", which was true when CAP was the only door. The CAP-specific wording moved into framing_by_ecosystem.cap where it belongs, and the node's own description now describes the concern rather than one ecosystem's version of it.Agent guidance
Mon 7
Agent guidancecore coverage, gap revisedThe gap's premise was that no SAP-published skill existed. One does now, so the gap is no longer about absence — it is about how much of the corpus four skills reach.Agent guidance
Mon 31
LLM integrationcore coverage revisedStates renamed to describe who is present rather than to interpret intent. left-open-on-purpose asserted a motive; core-and-community states a fact, with relationship carrying the intent separately.LLM integration