Skip to main content
Glama
LuisCarlosLopes

codesteer-atlas

by LuisCarlosLopes
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

atlas_graph

Query the derived knowledge graph to find hubs, shortest paths, node explanations, or the reverse-impact radius of a change. Reveals connectivity, centrality, and what breaks if a node changes.

Instructions

Query the derived knowledge graph for hubs, paths, neighborhood explanations, or the reverse-impact radius of a node.

Call this directly when the question is about connectivity, rationale, centrality, or "what breaks if I change this?" in the indexed workspace. It reads the derived graph.json produced by atlas_index; it does not rebuild the graph itself.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modeYesOne of `hubs`, `path`, `explain`, or `affected`.
top_nNoNumber of hubs to return for `hubs` mode. Must be between 1 and 50.
sourceNoRequired for `path`. Accepts exact node id, exact label, or a unique suffix.
targetNoRequired for `path`, `explain`, and `affected`. Accepts exact node id, exact label, or a unique suffix.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.4.4
    • changedInput schema / properties / mode / description
      Previous value: -"One of `hubs`, `path`, or `explain`."New value: +"One of `hubs`, `path`, `explain`, or `affected`."
    • changedInput schema / properties / target / description
      Previous value: -"Required for `path` and `explain`. Accepts exact node id, exact label,\nor a unique suffix."New value: +"Required for `path`, `explain`, and `affected`. Accepts exact node id,\nexact label, or a unique suffix."
  2. Addedv1.4.3

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description does real work: it discloses that the tool reads a derived artifact ('graph.json') produced by atlas_index and is not a rebuild operation. It does not cover return format or failure modes, but the read-only, derived-data nature is well communicated.

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?

Two tight sentences, no filler. The purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, with usage and a key boundary condition in the second.

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?

The tool has 4 parameters, an output schema, full schema coverage, and no annotations; the description covers purpose, usage triggers, and source-data provenance. It leaves minor gaps around cross-mode semantics and return shape, which the output schema partially absorbs.

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 the schema already documents parameter semantics including mode, top_n bounds, and source/target requirements. The description adds little to parameter meaning beyond implying multiple modes, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description states a specific verb ('Query') and resource ('the derived knowledge graph') and enumerates the exact operation modes (hubs, paths, neighborhood explanations, reverse-impact radius). It clearly distinguishes itself from atlas_index by noting it reads graph.json rather than rebuilding it.

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?

Explicitly says 'Call this directly when the question is about connectivity, rationale, centrality, or "what breaks if I change this?"' and names the alternative (atlas_index) it should not be conflated with. This gives a clear trigger condition and a boundary.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools