Retrieve the local neighborhood of a concept or symbol from a knowledge graph, returning connected nodes and edges. Use to explore relationships and context around an entity.
Return the local neighbourhood of a concept or symbol as {nodes, edges}.
repo_path: optional absolute path to the target repository.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| depth | No | ||
| entity | Yes | ||
| repo_path | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It adds minimal context: returns nodes and edges, and mentions the optional repo_path. But it omits details like limits, performance, or behavior when entity is not found.
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?
The description is very short with two sentences. It is front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by a parameter note. Efficient but could be slightly more structured.
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 3 parameters (1 required) and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the depth parameter's effect or the exact format of nodes and edges. More context is needed for a complete understanding.
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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the repo_path parameter but does not clarify entity or depth beyond the schema. This adds some value but not enough for full coverage.
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 clearly states the tool returns the local neighbourhood of a concept or symbol as {nodes, edges}. It is specific about what it does, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling graph tools like dependency_graph or graph_stats.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when not to use it or what prerequisites are needed.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.