Skip to main content
Glama

get_semantic_tokens

Retrieve semantic tokens for a file range, returning each token's type (function, variable, etc.) and modifiers (readonly, static) to understand the syntactic role of code elements.

Instructions

Get semantic tokens for a range in a file. Returns each token's type (function, variable, keyword, parameter, type, etc.) and modifiers (readonly, static, deprecated, etc.) with 1-based line/character positions. Use this to understand the syntactic role of code elements — distinct from hover which gives documentation. Only available when the language server supports textDocument/semanticTokens.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
end_lineYes
file_pathYes
end_columnYes
start_lineYes
language_idNo
start_columnYes
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses return types, positions, and the dependency on language server capabilities. Read-only nature is implied. No contradictions.

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?

Three sentences, each adding value: action/resource, return details, usage distinction and availability. No redundant information. Well-structured and efficient.

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 6 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description covers core functionality, return data, and constraints. Could include note on error behavior, but overall provides sufficient context for an agent.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain parameters. It implicitly describes the range parameters (start/end line/column, file_path) and mentions 1-based positions. Missing explanation for 'language_id' parameter, leaving a gap.

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 action ('Get semantic tokens') and the resource ('for a range in a file'). It specifies what is returned (token type, modifiers, positions) and distinguishes from hover, making tool purpose unambiguous.

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 advises when to use ('understand syntactic role of code elements') and distinguishes from hover. It also notes the availability constraint (language server support). Could be more explicit about alternatives, but the guidance 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/blackwell-systems/agent-lsp'

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