Collide MCP

blast_radius

Read-only

Before renaming, changing a signature or deleting: every symbol that depends on this one, level by level, with each dependent's file, owner and any in-flight work over it. Answers "what breaks if I change this" from the live code graph; skip it when the briefing's Coverage line says every dependent is already listed. 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": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "blast_radius"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`path`	Yes	Repo-relative file path of the symbol.
`depth`	No	How many hops of dependents to follow, 1 to 6 (default 3).
`symbol`	No	The symbol whose dependents to list; omit for the whole file.
`repo_id`	No	The repository id, e.g. github.com/org/repo (the Cork briefing names it). Omit it to use the repo your session works in.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 10, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / repo_id / description

Previous value: -"The repository id, e.g. github.com/org/repo (the Collide briefing names it). Omit it to use the repo your session works in."New value: +"The repository id, e.g. github.com/org/repo (the Cork briefing names it). Omit it to use the repo your session works in."

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 18, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / repo_id / description

Previous value: -"The repository id, e.g. github.com/org/repo (repo_id in .collide/config.json)."New value: +"The repository id, e.g. github.com/org/repo (the Collide briefing names it). Omit it to use the repo your session works in."

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "repo_id",
-  "path"
-]New value: +[
+  "path"
+]

Changed4 schema fields changedSep 27, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / depth / description

Added value: +"How many hops of dependents to follow, 1 to 6 (default 3)."

addedInput schema / properties / path / description

Added value: +"Repo-relative file path of the symbol."

addedInput schema / properties / repo_id / description

Added value: +"The repository id, e.g. github.com/org/repo (repo_id in .collide/config.json)."

addedInput schema / properties / symbol / description

Added value: +"The symbol whose dependents to list; omit for the whole file."

Changed10 schema fields changedSep 18, 2026
- removedInput schema / properties / depth / default
```
Removed value: -3
```
- removedInput schema / properties / depth / title
```
Removed value: -"Depth"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / path / description
```
Removed value: -"Repo-relative file path, e.g. src/app/api.py."
```
- removedInput schema / properties / path / title
```
Removed value: -"Path"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / repo_id / description
```
Removed value: -"Repository id — the git remote (e.g. github.com/acme/api) or a bare folder name; a #branch suffix scopes to that branch."
```
- removedInput schema / properties / repo_id / title
```
Removed value: -"Repo Id"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / symbol / default
```
Removed value: -""
```
- removedInput schema / properties / symbol / description
```
Removed value: -"A symbol in the file — function, class, method, or constant name."
```
- removedInput schema / properties / symbol / title
```
Removed value: -"Symbol"
```
- removedInput schema / title
```
Removed value: -"blast_radiusArguments"
```
AddedSep 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds real context beyond them: results are grouped level by level and each dependent carries its file, owner and any in-flight work, sourced from the live code graph. It doesn't cover failure modes or result limits, but for a read-only tool with annotations this is rich.

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 trigger and the output shape in a single dense sentence, then the skip condition. Every clause earns its place, though the phrasing is packed enough to read as one run-on.

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, so the description carries return-value duty and does so by naming file, owner and in-flight work per dependent plus the level-by-level structure. Enough for correct invocation; only error and truncation behavior are unstated.

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%, with all four parameters documented including depth bounds and the repo_id fallback, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only indirect meaning, tying the repo_id default to session context and the optional symbol to whole-file scope.

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?

Names a specific resource (every symbol that depends on this one, level by level) and the exact question it answers ("what breaks if I change this"). That is clearly distinguishable from reading a single symbol (get_symbol) or explaining code (explain_code).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives explicit when-to-use triggers (before renaming, changing a signature, deleting) and an explicit skip condition tied to the briefing's Coverage line. An agent has enough to decide without opening another tool.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Collide MCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?