Locate every incoming relationship to a symbol by name or ID, including calls, inheritance, imports, and definitions. Use it to trace dependent code across the codebase.
Find all references (any incoming relationship — CALLS, INHERITS, IMPORTS, DEFINES) to a symbol. Accepts a name or a full entity id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| source_id | No | ||
| name_or_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2026.9.23Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that all incoming relationship kinds are returned and that input can be a name or entity id, but it does not mention behavior on ambiguous names, result limits, or whether the operation is read-only.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two concise sentences with the core behavior and relationship taxonomy front-loaded. There is no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With an output schema present, the basic call is feasible, but the description leaves source_id unexplained and gives no guidance for choosing among the many graph/reference sibling tools. It is adequate but not complete for confident selection and invocation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies name_or_id as accepting 'a name or a full entity id', but says nothing about the optional source_id parameter, leaving its purpose unexplained.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Find all references' to a symbol, and enumerates the exact incoming relationship types (CALLS, INHERITS, IMPORTS, DEFINES). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like find_definition and find_callers.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies the tool is for discovering all incoming references, but it does not explicitly say when to choose this over find_callers, find_definition, or search_code. No exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative routing guidance is provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.