Skip to main content
Glama
Mibayy

token-savior

by Mibayy
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_full_context

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a symbol's location, source, dependencies, dependents, and change impact in one call. Use it to understand code structure and edit safely without grepping multiple files.

Instructions

Symbol bundle: location + source + deps/dependents (depth=1) or + change_impact (depth=2).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modeNocompact (default): source head 80 lines + deps/dependents as names only. full: raw payload.
nameNoSymbol name (function, method, class).
depthNo0=symbol+source, 1=+deps/dependents (default), 2=+change_impact.
namesNoBatch mode: list of names (max 10). Returns {name: result} dict. Mutually exclusive with 'name'.
intentNoOptional task/query. When set, long deps/dependents lists are ranked by relevance to it and trimmed to the top few with a recovery pointer — lossless (the rest stays reachable via mode='full').
symbolNoAlias de `name`. Symbol name (function, method, class).
projectNoProject name/path (default: active).
max_linesNoCap source lines (default 200).
symbol_nameNoAlias de `name`. Symbol name (function, method, class).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv4.24.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / intent
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional task/query. When set, long deps/dependents lists are ranked by relevance to it and trimmed to the top few with a recovery pointer — lossless (the rest stays reachable via mode='full').",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv4.20.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / symbol
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Alias de `name`. Symbol name (function, method, class).",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / symbol_name
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Alias de `name`. Symbol name (function, method, class).",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Addedv4.0.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description's contribution is the depth→content mapping, which is genuinely useful behavioral context but largely mirrors the depth parameter's own schema text, so it adds only modest value.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler, though the telegraphic style ('Symbol bundle: location + source...') trades some clarity for brevity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 9-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is thin: it never addresses batch mode, the intent-ranking behavior, or what the bundle returns. The schema carries those details, so it is minimally viable rather than complete.

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 mode, depth, intent, batch names, aliases and max_lines in detail. The description only restates the depth semantics, adding no syntax or format detail beyond the schema — baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a composition (location + source + deps/dependents + change_impact) gated by depth, which is more specific than a tautology, but the shorthand 'location' is ambiguous and it does not distinguish this aggregate tool from the many sibling getters that supply the same pieces individually (get_function_source, get_dependencies, get_dependents, get_change_impact, get_edit_context).

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives. The depth parameter hints at escalating scope but the description never tells the agent when to reach for this bundle instead of the single-purpose sibling tools.

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