Skip to main content
Glama
aimasteracc

tree-sitter-analyzer

project

Retrieve project overview, enumerate source files, get task-focused context, check parser readiness, and manage decision journal and doc sync.

Instructions

Code-intelligence (codegraph-compatible) project-intelligence hub. Covers codegraph_metrics (graph-level stats), project overview, file enumeration, smart task-focused context, parser readiness, agent skills/workflow, decision journal, and doc sync in one tool. Pick a capability via action:

PROJECT INFO (read-only):

  • action=overview — high-level summary of languages, entry points, and architecture. Best first call on an unfamiliar repo. Params: format.

  • action=files — enumerate source files with filtering. Params: path, extensions, limit, format.

  • action=smart — S2 task-focused context: surfaces relevant symbols, callers, and files for a task description. Distinct from overview (task-scoped vs whole-project). Params: task, limit.

  • action=parser — check tree-sitter parser readiness for the project languages. Params: format.

  • action=tools — verify availability of CLI tools (ripgrep, fd, etc.). Params: (none).

  • action=metrics — codegraph graph-level statistics (node/edge counts, top hubs, codegraph_metrics equivalent). Params: format.

  • action=skills — enumerate available agent skills for this project. Params: format.

  • action=workflow — recommended agent workflow for the current task type. Params: task_type, format.

DECISION + DOC (may write):

  • action=journal — read or append project decision journal entries. Params: operation, entry, limit.

  • action=doc_sync — sync documentation to current code state. Params: path, dry_run.

For index lifecycle (status/build/full/auto/sync/cache), use the index facade instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionYesWhich capability to invoke. One of: doc_sync, files, journal, metrics, overview, parser, skills, smart, tools, workflow
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?

Annotations are all false, but the description explicitly marks actions as read-only (PROJECT INFO) or may write (DECISION + DOC), providing behavioral context beyond the schema. However, it omits details like side effects, rate limits, or authentication needs.

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?

The description is well-structured with clear sections for read-only and write actions, and each action is listed with its parameters. Though lengthy, it is organized and front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

Given the high parameter count (10) and no output schema, the description explains many actions but leaves some parameters undocumented. It does not describe return values, and the absence of output schema means the agent must infer results. Completeness is adequate but not thorough.

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?

The description adds meaning for parameters mentioned per action (e.g., format, path, limit) but fails to explain several schema parameters (scope, mode, file_path, symbol, etc.). Schema coverage is low, and description only partially compensates.

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 the tool is a 'project-intelligence hub' covering multiple capabilities (overview, files, smart, etc.) and distinguishes itself from the sibling 'index' tool by directing index lifecycle actions to that facade. The verb and resource are specific, and the purpose is immediately clear.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided for each action, including when to use them (e.g., 'Best first call on an unfamiliar repo' for overview) and when not to ('For index lifecycle... use the ``index`` facade instead'). This clearly differentiates usage from siblings.

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