Skip to main content
Glama
aimasteracc

tree-sitter-analyzer

by aimasteracc
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

index

Manage code intelligence index lifecycle: build, sync, cache, status, and schema actions. Query or update AST-based indexes for local code analysis and project health grading.

Instructions

Code-intelligence (codegraph-compatible) index lifecycle hub. Actions: auto, build, cache, full, knowledge, schema, status, sync. Pass action=help with target_action for an exact action schema.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modeNoAction sub-mode (e.g. summary|cycles).
limitNoMax results.
queryNoSearch query/pattern.
scopeNoAction discriminator (e.g. point|graph).
actionYesWhich business capability to invoke, or help for discovery. One of: auto, build, cache, full, help, knowledge, schema, status, sync
symbolNoSymbol/function name.
languageNoLanguage hint (usually auto).
file_pathNoTarget file path.
access_modeNoStatus-only read mode; never creates or migrates an index.read_existing
function_nameNoFunction name (alias of symbol).
output_formatNoOutput format: JSON.
target_actionNoBusiness action to describe when action is help.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv2.2.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / action / description
      Previous value: -"Which capability to invoke. One of: auto, build, cache, full, knowledge, schema, status, sync"New value: +"Which business capability to invoke, or help for discovery. One of: auto, build, cache, full, help, knowledge, schema, status, sync"
    • changedInput schema / properties / action / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "auto",
-  "build",
-  "cache",
-  "full",
-  "knowledge",
-  "schema",
-  "status",
-  "sync"
-]New value: +[
+  "auto",
+  "build",
+  "cache",
+  "full",
+  "help",
+  "knowledge",
+  "schema",
+  "status",
+  "sync"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / target_action
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Business action to describe when action is help.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed5 schema fields changedv1.30.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / access_mode
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "read_existing",
+  "description": "Status-only read mode; never creates or migrates an index.",
+  "enum": [
+    "read_existing"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / action / description
      Previous value: -"Which capability to invoke. One of: auto, build, cache, full, knowledge, status, sync"New value: +"Which capability to invoke. One of: auto, build, cache, full, knowledge, schema, status, sync"
    • changedInput schema / properties / action / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "auto",
-  "build",
-  "cache",
-  "full",
-  "knowledge",
-  "status",
-  "sync"
-]New value: +[
+  "auto",
+  "build",
+  "cache",
+  "full",
+  "knowledge",
+  "schema",
+  "status",
+  "sync"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / output_format / description
      Previous value: -"Output format (toon|json)."New value: +"Output format: JSON."
    • addedInput schema / properties / output_format / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "json"
+]
  3. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.29.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / action / description
      Previous value: -"Which capability to invoke. One of: auto, build, cache, full, status, sync"New value: +"Which capability to invoke. One of: auto, build, cache, full, knowledge, status, sync"
    • changedInput schema / properties / action / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "auto",
-  "build",
-  "cache",
-  "full",
-  "status",
-  "sync"
-]New value: +[
+  "auto",
+  "build",
+  "cache",
+  "full",
+  "knowledge",
+  "status",
+  "sync"
+]
  4. First observedv1.23.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With all four annotations false, the description carries the behavioral burden; it discloses the help/discovery behavior and implies mixed read/write operations via verbs like build/cache/sync versus status/schema. However, it does not state which actions mutate state, what side effects build or cache have, or any prerequisites. It does not contradict the annotations, but disclosure is thinner than the tool's complexity warrants.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the resource identity before the action list and help pointer. The action list partially duplicates the schema's action enum, but it serves as a useful at-a-glance summary. No wasted words or filler.

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 12-parameter, 9-action dispatcher with no output schema and uninformative annotations, the description is thin: it never maps parameters to actions or describes side-effect profiles per action. The action=help discovery mechanism is a genuine mitigation that gives the agent a path to exact action schemas, which justifies an average rather than low score.

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 baseline is 3 and all 12 parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds modest value by wiring action=help together with target_action as the discovery combination, though the schema's target_action field already says 'Business action to describe when action is help.' No other parameter semantics are added 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?

Names a specific resource domain ('code-intelligence index lifecycle hub') with a 'codegraph-compatible' qualifier that anchors it apart from siblings like search or viz. The action menu (auto/build/cache/full/knowledge/schema/status/sync) makes the dispatch verbs explicit. It misses a 5 because the actions are bare names with no definitions, leaving what each capability actually does opaque.

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?

Provides one practical usage hint: 'Pass action=help with target_action for an exact action schema,' telling the agent how to discover per-action parameters. It never states when to select this tool over siblings such as search, nav, or health, nor gives exclusions or prerequisites. Usage context is implied by the 'index lifecycle' framing rather than explicitly stated.

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