Skip to main content
Glama
Smart Quota Orchestrator

Smart Quota Orchestrator

by ElNeMeR70

sqo_blast_radius

Trace transitive reverse-import dependents to find downstream files affected by modified paths, then return only those files and the minimal unit tests needed.

Instructions

Trace transitive reverse-import dependents (who imports X) and return ONLY affected downstream files and minimal unit tests to run.

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": {
      "workspace": "<workspace>",
      "targets": "<targets>"
    },
    "name": "sqo_blast_radius"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
targetsYesModified relative file paths.
workspaceYesWorkspace root path.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv13.0.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses output scope ('ONLY affected downstream files and minimal unit tests'), implying a filtered, non-exhaustive read, but says nothing about read-only safety, traversal depth limits, indexing prerequisites, or how the 'minimal' test set is computed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single dense sentence with zero redundancy, front-loading the action and direction before the return contract. Every clause contributes information.

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?

For a two-parameter, read-only analysis tool with no output schema, the description covers intent, direction, and a rough return contract. It falls short only on traversal depth and output granularity, which an agent might reasonably want before invoking.

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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters are documented structurally. The description adds only the conceptual role of targets as the 'X' whose importers are traced, with no format, multi-target, or workspace-resolution detail beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Trace transitive reverse-import dependents', with a parenthetical '(who imports X)' that pins down direction, plus 'return ONLY affected downstream files and minimal unit tests'. This makes the import-graph axis distinguishable from caller-graph or dependency-slice siblings, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: 'minimal unit tests to run' signals a post-change impact / test-selection scenario. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative (e.g., callers vs importers) to route the agent.

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