Skip to main content
Glama
aimasteracc

tree-sitter-analyzer

index

Manage code intelligence index lifecycle: check health, query AST cache, perform full rebuild, enable auto-indexing, or run incremental sync.

Instructions

Code-intelligence (codegraph-compatible) index lifecycle hub. Covers codegraph_status, codegraph_full_index, codegraph_autoindex, codegraph_incremental_sync, and AST cache query in one tool. Pick a capability via action:

READ-ONLY:

  • action=status — check codegraph index health without writing (codegraph_status equivalent). Returns node/edge counts, staleness, and error indicators. Params: (none).

  • action=cache — query the raw AST cache for symbols, types, and references. Params: query, file_path, kind, limit.

WRITES ON-DISK INDEX:

  • action=build — full (re)build of the project index. Slow; use when index is absent or corrupt. Params: force.

  • action=full — force a complete full reindex (codegraph_full_index equivalent). Params: (none).

  • action=auto — enable/configure background auto-indexing (codegraph_autoindex equivalent). Params: enable, watch.

  • action=sync — run one incremental sync pass (fast; use after editing files, codegraph_incremental_sync equivalent). Params: paths.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionYesWhich capability to invoke. One of: auto, build, cache, full, status, sync
scopeNoAction discriminator (e.g. point|graph).
modeNoAction sub-mode (e.g. summary|cycles).
file_pathNoTarget file path.
symbolNoSymbol/function name.
function_nameNoFunction name (alias of symbol).
queryNoSearch query/pattern.
languageNoLanguage hint (usually auto).
limitNoMax results.
output_formatNoOutput format (toon|json).
Behavior4/5

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

With annotations providing minimal behavioral cues (readOnlyHint=false, etc.), the description compensates by explicitly listing which actions are read-only (status, cache) and which write on-disk (build, full, auto, sync). It also notes that build is slow and sync fast, adding valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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?

The description is well-structured with clear sections for read-only and write operations, uses bullet-like formatting, and front-loads the overall purpose. Every sentence provides useful information without redundancy.

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?

Given the complexity (10 parameters, no output schema), the description covers each action's behavior, parameters, and side effects. It lacks mention of error scenarios or return values, but for a hub tool it is comprehensive.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds context for action-specific parameters (e.g., for cache action: query, file_path, kind, limit) but does not explain 'scope' or 'mode' parameters, leaving them to the schema's generic descriptions. The added value is moderate.

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 clearly states that the tool is a 'code-intelligence index lifecycle hub' and lists each action with specific verbs and resources (status, cache, build, full, auto, sync). It distinguishes read-only vs write operations and provides equivalents to other tools, making its purpose unambiguous and differentiating it from siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explicitly tells when to use each action (e.g., 'use when index is absent or corrupt' for build) and highlights performance characteristics (fast vs slow). It does not compare directly to sibling tools like 'search' for general code queries, but within the tool it is clear.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/aimasteracc/tree-sitter-analyzer'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server