Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
codegraph

codegraph

by attnstack
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

cycles

Detect circular imports by listing file-level strongly connected components in TypeScript/JavaScript repositories, so you can trace dependency loops and resolve them.

Instructions

import 循环依赖：文件级强连通分量清单

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "cycles"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.1.2

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does reveal the return shape (a list of file-level strongly connected components), which is useful behavioral context, but says nothing about whether the graph is scoped to the whole repo, whether it is read-only, or how large the output can get.

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?

A single front-loaded clause with zero padding, and the key concept (circular imports) leads. It is arguably too terse rather than too long, but no sentence is wasted.

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?

With no parameters and no output schema, the description must convey what comes back, and it only says 'file-level SCC list' without specifying element structure, file paths, or granularity. It is adequate to identify the tool but thin for actually interpreting results.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline of 4 applies. The description does not need to compensate for any schema gap here.

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?

The description names a specific analysis resource: import circular dependencies, returned as a file-level strongly connected component list. That is far more than a restatement of the name 'cycles' and tells an agent exactly what concept is computed. It does not, however, distinguish itself from related siblings such as impact, trace, or who_calls.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of any alternative tool. An agent must infer from the phrase 'circular dependencies' alone that this is the right pick over impact or trace when diagnosing import cycles.

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