BrowseAll ecosystems
Everything in the atlas
26 of 2341
Domain
Signals
Content: The reasoning
More: 2
Group by: Ecosystem
EntryBySignalsLast activity
No ecosystem
A Clearer View of Your SAP Integrations Under the New API PolicyA Clearer View of Your SAP Integrations Under the New API PolicyThe SAP API Policy Evidence Skill assesses one SAP interface or usage pattern at a time against SAP API Policy v.4.2026a, reading evidence from five MCP servers, among them servers for the Business Accelerator Hub and SAP Notes, mcp-sap-docs and a read-only ARC-1, and returns one of four labels with a confidence level, an evidence table, residual risk and questions for SAP. It gives no compliant or not compliant answer on purpose, because SAP's FAQ (Q49) declines to publish a binding decision matrix, and it sends legal, commercial and roadmap questions to SAP and lowers its confidence when a source is not connected. Four sample runs show the method, among them ODP-RFC extraction labelled likely not aligned under SAP Note 3255746 and the same API_SALES_ORDER_SRV assessed differently for an autonomous agent behind a custom gateway and for a Boomi middleware flow; the SAP Notes and Business Accelerator Hub servers read SAP sites through a browser login, which the post says to use at your own risk.published 2026-06-02
ABAP and Agentic AI: The Hidden Problem in Real ProjectsABAP and Agentic AI: The Hidden Problem in Real ProjectsAI in SAP development splits on three questions, how the model gets context, where writing happens and who controls the setup: UI5 and CAP work in local files where git, reviews, tests and pipelines already gate a change, while on-stack ABAP writes land directly in a shared development system. Six patterns follow, framed after a paper by Lars Hvam, from AI in the IDE to off-stack development with abapGit, and the post settles on a hybrid where the agent reads the system over ADT or MCP and writes through a gated git flow. Read access alone is put at maybe 80 percent of the work, and what agent access to your code still lacks is named as tool governance: read-only defaults, package restrictions, blocking free SQL, per-user identity and auditing.published 2026-04-22
ABAP Development Automation with ARC-1 and GitHub WorkflowsABAP Development Automation with ARC-1 and GitHub WorkflowsA sample repository puts an ABAP package into GitHub with abapGit and connects GitHub Actions to ARC-1 on BTP through an API key with no write tools, so abaplint on the diff, ABAP Unit and ATC through SAPDiagnose, label-triggered Copilot and Claude reviews, and ST22 dump triage all run as checks on a pull request. The review case is PR #14, where a SAPRead of the activated method let Claude state that a direct SELECT from MARA was new in the PR and not yet active in SAP, which a diff-only review cannot know. The test gate reads activated objects, so a team that pushes before activation needs a sandbox or a pull-and-activate step, and pulling a merged change back into SAP is named as the next step, not built.published 2026-05-12
Access to Generative AI ModelsAccess to Generative AI ModelsSets out the plain way to call a deployed generative AI model on SAP BTP: a request that carries the prompt, the model and the parameters that control generation, with the same code able to switch between models. It lists data masking, prompt templating and filtering as features that come with the access rather than as code the caller writes, which is the shape LLM integration takes on the BTP door; the page's implementation sections sit behind its steps and were not read.
Agentic AI Security & GovernanceAgentic AI Security & GovernanceNames seven threat categories agentic AI introduces beyond ordinary application security: prompt injection, excessive agency, supply-chain and model-integrity compromise, memory poisoning, improper output handling, resource abuse and agent-to-agent communication poisoning. Its answer is a defence-in-depth structure of security controls, input validation, privilege management, supply-chain checks, memory segmentation, output validation, execution quotas, secure communication, paired with governance and oversight: audit logging, explainability, human-in-the-loop review, fairness assessment and continuous monitoring. States the reason plainly: an agent decides, chains actions across turns, keeps memory between them and can act on real systems, a different risk profile from a single request-response call. That is the authorisation and audit-trail question tool governance is named for.
ARC-1 1.0: One Deployment, Multiple SAP SystemsARC-1 1.0: One Deployment, Multiple SAP SystemsThe release post for ARC-1 1.0, whose largest addition is an experimental multi-system mode: one BTP Cloud Foundry deployment attaches the SAP systems or clients an administrator selects through destinations, each with its own MCP address and an optional combined one, beside 22 included skills, an extension framework for company-specific tools, the BTP login code split out as @arc-mcp/xsuaa-auth, and a move to the ARC MCP organisation. It names the contributions behind the release: Wouter Lemaire for the first Cloud Foundry deployment and the first multi-backend implementation, Sami Bouguerra for NetWeaver 7.50 fixtures and activations that looked successful but were not, Clément Ringot for BTP login and Cloud Connector fixes, and Geert-Jan Klaps for S/4HANA Public Cloud support. It places SAP's own ADT MCP Server as the choice for a developer inside VS Code or Eclipse and ARC-1 as a shared service on BTP, and it stops short of a licence answer: the ADT web endpoints are not listed as published APIs in the SAP Business Accelerator Hub, so readers are told to ask SAP whether their agreement allows third-party tools to use them before a broader or production rollout.published 2026-08-03
ARC-1 on SAP BTP: Secure ABAP Agentic Development Beyond the LaptopARC-1 on SAP BTP: Secure ABAP Agentic Development Beyond the LaptopThe BTP deployment of ARC-1: one Cloud Foundry app per SAP system, reached by MCP clients through XSUAA and reaching the backend through the SAP Destination service, the SAP Connectivity service and Cloud Connector, with a BasicAuth destination for startup probing and a Principal Propagation destination for per-user requests, and SAP_PP_STRICT=true so a propagation problem fails instead of falling back to the shared user. Tool governance is the three gates it spells out, the server ceiling set by environment variables, the user's permission from XSUAA role collections, OIDC scopes or API-key profiles, and the SAP backend authorisation, all of which must allow an action, and the staged rollout from read-only to writes in $TMP, then selected packages, then transport writes. It recommends the MTA deployment over Docker on Cloud Foundry or a buildpack push, treats BTP ABAP Environment as a separate service-key scenario with no Cloud Connector, and is not a full setup guide: the commands are left to the ARC-1 deployment docs.published 2026-04-29
ARC-1 on SAP BTP: Secure ABAP Agentic Development Beyond the Laptop
arc-1 has been through 3 major lines since this was published: 0.8 (2026-05), 0.9 (2026-05), 1 (2026-07). Affects A recipe.
ARC-1 with Copilot Studio: SAP System Context Beyond DevelopersARC-1 with Copilot Studio: SAP System Context Beyond DevelopersTakes the BTP-deployed ARC-1 endpoint into Microsoft Copilot Studio, added as an existing MCP server with OAuth 2.0 against XSUAA and published to Teams or Microsoft 365 Copilot, so SAP system context reaches project roles that do not work in an IDE. The test agent combines SharePoint specifications, Jira tickets and mcp-sap-docs with ARC-1 in six scenarios: a patch for a Jira bug proposed before it is applied, the impact of widening a domain from CURR 13,2 to CURR 23,2, a two-layer CDS view built from a specification, an ATC and abaplint quality report, a short dump diagnosis, and a clean core check that proposes released successors for direct selects on USR02 and BUT000. The access path and security model are those of the BTP part unchanged; the advice is to start this audience read-only, although the showcase itself enabled the read and write tools.published 2026-05-04
ARC-1 with Copilot Studio: SAP System Context Beyond Developers
arc-1 has been through 3 major lines since this was published: 0.8 (2026-05), 0.9 (2026-05), 1 (2026-07). Affects A recipe, Runnable code.
ARC-1 with Joule Studio: Bringing Real ABAP System Context into JouleARC-1 with Joule Studio: Bringing Real ABAP System Context into JouleBrings the same BTP-deployed ARC-1 endpoint into Joule through a Joule Studio, classic edition agent configured with Anthropic Claude Sonnet 4 and two MCP servers, ARC-1 and mcp-sap-docs, for work that starts in SAP where the previous part started in Microsoft 365. Two read-only showcases carry the ABAP Cloud readiness edge: a clean core check of one class that reports it is not released, uses USR02 and BUT000 directly and has no ATC findings, and a modernisation backlog for package ZSD_LEGACY which, as that package did not exist, grouped 28 ZSD* objects into risk buckets instead. The route through SAP Integration Suite API Management or a future MCP gateway is presented as a target architecture and not yet a productive setup, because Joule Studio's documentation requires streamable HTTP destinations and does not support MCP servers that need interactive OAuth user authorisation.published 2026-05-06
ARC-1 with Joule Studio: Bringing Real ABAP System Context into Joule
arc-1 has been through 2 major lines since this was published: 0.9 (2026-05), 1 (2026-07). Affects Runnable code.
Before You Upgrade S/4HANA: Static UI5 Checks with MCPBefore You Upgrade S/4HANA: Static UI5 Checks with MCPA UI5 version upgrade checked against one app by pairing two MCP servers: the ui5_version_diff tool added to mcp-sap-docs, which reads a bundle from ui5-lib-diff downloaded once at setup and filters it by version range, change type, library or query text, and @ui5/mcp-server, whose get_project_info, get_version_info, run_ui5_linter and run_manifest_validation say what the app uses and what fails. Run with a ui5-versions-upgrade.md skill on the legacy app from From SEGW and Legacy UI5 to RAP with ARC-1, from SAPUI5 1.84.59 to 1.147.2, the diff range held 985 deprecations and 961 What's New entries, and the linting and manifest validation narrowed that to findings in this app, among them jQuery.sap.require, synchronous bootstrap, the sap_belize theme, sap.m.MessagePage and an old manifest _version. The checks read the source in a local checkout and never the deployed app, so the report is a first pass: a changelog entry is not proof that a workaround can be deleted, and the app still has to be run and tested.published 2026-05-20
Building an Enterprise-Ready SAP AI Agent with Open SourceBuilding an Enterprise-Ready SAP AI Agent with Open SourceA self-hosted chat agent for SAP systems: LibreChat as UI and orchestrator with Entra ID sign-in and SharePoint connected, a local LLM through Ollama, and two MCP servers, mcp-sap-docs for public documentation and the ADT MCP server vibing-steampunk for the system itself. The ADT server runs in its read-only mode under a technical user with display authorisations only, so the agent can find a function module and pull its source, or locate a RAP business object with its behaviour definition and projection view, but cannot change anything. Two workflows show it, explaining what BAPI_DISPUTE_CREATE does in one system and planning a RAP action from a PDF specification, where the generated ABAP is copied into Eclipse by hand; the full setup is in the marianfoo/llm-client-sap-system-integration-sharepoint repository.published 2026-03-03
Content FilteringContent FilteringContent filtering screens a large language model's input and output for low-quality, irrelevant or unsafe content: the four categories it names being hateful, violent, sexual and vulgar content, checking a request once on the way in and once on the way back. The page states smaller models can do this filtering efficiently, reading perplexity scores to flag anomalies, with the aim that SAP AI Core produces content meeting a stated safety standard, which is the ground content filtering covers on the BTP door.
Content-based Agents with SAP Joule Studio Agent BuilderContent-based Agents with SAP Joule Studio Agent BuilderJoule Studio, classic edition, the capability in SAP Build the page calls Joule Studio, is where an organisation creates and manages its own Joule skills and Joule agents; its Agent Builder is for a custom agent that handles a multi-step task by combining instructions, model-backed planning and reasoning, and a configured set of tools, Joule skills, document resources, MCP servers, or other agents run as subagents. The page states an agent executes inside the calling user's own security context through SAP Cloud Identity Services, and can be tried against a test conversation before deployment. That is the tool-and-turn-taking ground agent tooling covers, here built through Joule Studio rather than in application code.
Custom Joule SkillsCustom Joule SkillsA custom Joule skill is a workflow written to extend what Joule does out of the box for one specific business need, built and deployed through Joule Studio in SAP Build; the page states this is the supported way to extend Joule's built-in capabilities. Through Joule Studio a skill reaches SAP and external APIs via the destinations already configured in the BTP subaccount and Build environment, with the workflow itself versioned, monitored and deployable from the same tool.
Data MaskingData MaskingData masking replaces identifiable or confidential text in a prompt with placeholders such as <Person_0> or <Organization_1> before it reaches a large language model, using pattern matching and machine learning to find what to replace. The page states SAP AI Core supports it as a feature and sets out five steps for applying it, defining the masking scope, choosing a technique, preserving the prompt's intent, checking compliance and risk, then testing and monitoring the result. That is the shape data masking takes on the BTP door.
Document GroundingDocument GroundingDocument Grounding is a managed retrieval-augmented-generation service under the Generative AI Hub on BTP, which SAP's page on SAP AI Core places inside that service: it ingests documents from Amazon S3, SharePoint, SAP Document Management Service, SAP Work Zone or an SFTP server, and handles chunking, embedding and retrieval itself, refreshing content automatically when a source document changes. The page states this managed path is recommended for most enterprise scenarios because it covers the whole lifecycle end to end, and offers a separate Document Grounding Vector API for data that is already chunked and embedded, for cases that need finer control over chunking and metadata.
Finally: An MCP Server for ABAPFinally: An MCP Server for ABAPAnnounces the ABAP variant of mcp-sap-docs, published at mcp-abap.marianzeis.de for GitHub Copilot's Agent Mode in ADT for Eclipse, which the post names as the trigger, with ABAP knowledge still a recurring problem in the models. Documentation irrelevant to ABAP was removed from the SAP docs server and the ABAP Keyword Documentation, the DSAG ABAP Development Guidelines and the ABAP Style Guide were added, with search reaching past the local index to SAP Community posts and SAP Help. Copilot in Eclipse is where the post puts the weight, because SAP Joule for Developers, ABAP AI capabilities in Eclipse is not available for S/4HANA on-premise systems; an update of 2026-02-05 adds Software Heroes as an online source and an abap_feature_matrix tool that checks feature availability across releases and ABAP Cloud, and the server runs hosted or locally with Node or Docker.published 2026-02-04
From SEGW and Legacy UI5 to RAP with ARC-1From SEGW and Legacy UI5 to RAP with ARC-1Three ARC-1 skills, run in Cursor with Composer-2 against a deliberately rough demo on an S/4HANA 2023 trial system, turn the SEGW service ZDEMO_MIG_PROJECTS_SRV into a managed, draft-enabled RAP business object published as OData V4, replace its ApproveProject function import and its direct UPDATE ... COMMIT WORK with the action approve_project written in EML in local mode, and rebuild the freestyle UI5 JavaScript app once in UI5 TypeScript and once as a Fiori elements list report and object page driven by metadata extensions. What the published transcripts add is how the agent got there: it found the generated MPC class names and the custom logic in DPC_EXT only by reading the system, the skills made it print the extracted model and stop for confirmation before writing, and @ui5/mcp-server, mcp-sap-docs and @sap-ux/fiori-mcp-server each had their own job beside it. The demo is small on purpose, and the post says a productive SEGW service that calls BAPIs, carries custom authorisation logic or supports deep inserts is not solved with one prompt.published 2026-05-11
From SEGW and Legacy UI5 to RAP with ARC-1
@sap-ux/fiori-mcp-server has been through 2 major lines since this was published: 0.7 (2026-05), 1 (2026-05). Affects Runnable code.
How I Use AI for Development and Why Context MattersHow I Use AI for Development and Why Context MattersPart one of the AI ABAP development series traces a move from pasting ChatGPT output and error messages back and forth to tools that search, read docs and inspect files themselves, and holds that the context around a model decides more in real projects than benchmark results do. In SAP work the grounding comes from mcp-sap-docs, which brings SAP Help, GitHub repositories, style guides and DSAG guidelines into the session, and context for changing a class also means the tables it uses, the classes it calls and similar implementations. Agentic autonomy is a slider set per project, with the time saved on typing moved into planning and review, and the post stops before ABAP: SAP's MCP servers for UI5, CAP and Fiori (@ui5/mcp-server, @cap-js/mcp-server, @sap-ux/fiori-mcp-server) sit in off-stack work that git and pipelines already gate, and the harder ABAP case is left to the next part.published 2026-04-20
Introducing ARC-1: A Secure ADT MCP Server for Enterprise SAP DevelopmentIntroducing ARC-1: A Secure ADT MCP Server for Enterprise SAP DevelopmentWhy ARC-1 exists beside earlier ADT MCP servers such as vibing-steampunk, fr0ster/mcp-abap-adt and dassian-adt: one centrally deployed instance per SAP system instead of a server on each developer laptop, with the MCP client to ARC-1 hop and the ARC-1 to SAP hop authenticated separately. It sets out the restrictive defaults (read-only, no free SQL or named table preview, writes confined to $TMP), the layering in which ARC-1's configuration, the user's role and SAP's own authorisation must all allow an action, Principal Propagation so SAP sees the real user, and audit events to the SAP Audit Log service; that is tool governance as much as agent access to your code. It leaves the BTP setup to the next part, and places ARC-1 beside SAP's ADT MCP Server, which SAP's configuration guide describes as a local HTTP server hosted by the IDE, and beside SAP API Policy 4.2026a, where ARC-1's stated position is to stay close to documented ADT behaviour and ask SAP before production use.published 2026-04-27
Introducing open-rfc: Calling SAP RFC from Node.js Without the SDKIntroducing open-rfc: Calling SAP RFC from Node.js Without the SDKopen-rfc is a TypeScript and JavaScript RFC client for Node.js with no runtime dependencies and no SAP NetWeaver RFC SDK, written after SAP archived node-rfc and PyRFC and while the connector below @sap/cds-rfc needs an S-user, an SAP Build Code licence and a private registry. The history of RFC connectivity from Node.js is the first half; the second shows the package on its own, as an npm alias for node-rfc, and through an npm override as the connector below an unchanged @sap/cds-rfc. The 0.2.3 beta stops at direct application-server connections with password authentication and classic Unicode RFC: no message-server load balancing, SNC, tRFC, qRFC, bgRFC or server mode.published 2026-08-10
Model Context Protocol (MCP)Model Context Protocol (MCP)Frames the Model Context Protocol as the answer to an M-times-N integration problem: one shared protocol turns M agents and N tools into M plus N connections, and one server can be called by any compliant agent. On SAP BTP its implementation section lists an SAP MCP Hub as a no-code way to expose enterprise tools, SAP Integration Suite's MCP Gateway as what it calls the governed path for exposing SAP and non-SAP APIs as MCP-compliant tools, custom SDK-based servers, SAP's MCP servers for development, and an MCP adapter for CDS as a CAP plugin marked coming soon. That is the ground MCP servers covers; for security it points at a separate page.
Pro-Code AI AgentsPro-Code AI AgentsPro-code agents are the most flexible way the page frames building an agentic workflow on SAP BTP: full autonomy, custom API integrations and algorithms chosen by the developer, set against declarative alternatives such as content-based agents and Joule Scenarios. It names LangGraph as the framework it recommends for production, enterprise-grade agentic workflows, alongside the ReAct pattern as the plan-act-observe loop such an agent runs. That is the ground agent tooling covers, building an agent's own tool-calling loop rather than exposing an application to somebody else's agent.
Prompt TemplatingPrompt TemplatingPrompt templating replaces a static prompt with a structured, reusable template whose placeholders are filled in at runtime, which the page says helps LLM responses stay consistent and lets the same instructions be adapted across tasks. On SAP AI Core this is implemented through the Prompt Registry, and the page states that storing prompts as plain strings in code is possible but not recommended. That is prompt management as a stored and managed object rather than a string embedded in the caller.
UI5 Has Entered the Chat: Building Interactive MCP Apps for SAPUI5 Has Entered the Chat: Building Interactive MCP Apps for SAPMCP Apps let an MCP tool point at a ui:// resource that a compatible host renders in a sandboxed iframe, and the post walks through the five samples of UI5con_2026_MCPApps, built with Mike Zaschka for UI5con, from a plain HTML time tool through UI5 Web Components and UI Integration Cards to UI5 lint findings from @ui5/mcp-server and an ARC-1 transport review. In the samples the model selects the tool and does not generate the interface, the prebuilt kind of generative UI, and the subject is the server side of MCP servers: register the resource, link it from the tool's _meta.ui.resourceUri, return text content as a fallback beside structuredContent, call callServerTool() only for tools of the server that owns the app, and send a message to the host when another server such as ARC-1 has to act. It stops at the host, whose support differs by client and whose iframe sandbox is not a complete security model, and Joule support for MCP Apps could not be verified at the time of writing.published 2026-07-13
Vector RAG vs Graph RAGVector RAG vs Graph RAGA section introduction rather than the comparison itself: it states that the choice between Vector RAG and Graph RAG depends on the domain and the task, and that Vector RAG is the one to use when the subject area has a clear description and the model must be held to specific data structures and attribute values. The four sub-pages it introduces, two on vector-based and two on graph-based RAG, carry the comparison. It sits on the same retrieval question retrieval-augmented generation answers, without naming CDS, CAP or a store.