Skip to main content
Glama
firelock-ai

kin

Official
by firelock-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

trace_path

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find how one code entity reaches another by showing hop routes between a start UUID or name and an end entity in the repository graph.

Instructions

How one entity reaches another, as hops. One endpoint? trace_data_flow.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toYesEnd entity.
fromYesStart: UUID, exact name, or name@file.
limitNoRoutes returned, shortest first.
to_fileNoDeprecated; pin with name@file.
directionNo`forward`, `reverse` or `either`.either
from_fileNoDeprecated; pin with name@file.
max_charsNoSoft cap on reply bytes.
max_depthNoHops between the ends (max 12).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed8 schema fields changedv0.7.17
    • changedInput schema / properties / direction / description
      Previous value: -"`forward`: from reaches to. `reverse`: the other way. `either` (default) tries both."New value: +"`forward`, `reverse` or `either`."
    • changedInput schema / properties / from / description
      Previous value: -"Source end: entity UUID, exact name, or name@file to pin one of two same-named entities."New value: +"Start: UUID, exact name, or name@file."
    • changedInput schema / properties / from_file / description
      Previous value: -"Pin `from` to the entity of that name in this file. Same as the name@file spelling."New value: +"Deprecated; pin with name@file."
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Previous value: -"Routes returned, shortest first (default 3, ceiling 25). See `routes_total`."New value: +"Routes returned, shortest first."
    • changedInput schema / properties / max_chars / description
      Previous value: -"Serialized characters this response may occupy; what was cut is named in `elisions`."New value: +"Soft cap on reply bytes."
    • changedInput schema / properties / max_depth / description
      Previous value: -"Hops between the two ends (default 6, ceiling 12). Containment hops are not counted."New value: +"Hops between the ends (max 12)."
    • changedInput schema / properties / to / description
      Previous value: -"Target end, in the same forms."New value: +"End entity."
    • changedInput schema / properties / to_file / description
      Previous value: -"Deprecated, answered through 0.7.16; pass the entity id in `to`. Pins `to` by file."New value: +"Deprecated; pin with name@file."
  2. First observedv0.7.16

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is fully carried by structured data. The description adds only that results are expressed as hops, with nothing on truncation behavior, depth limits, or cost of large traversals – adequate but not rich.

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?

Two fragments, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed immediately by the routing rule. No filler; every word earns its place.

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?

For an 8-parameter traversal tool with no output schema, the schema plus annotations cover parameters and safety well, and the description supplies the sibling routing. The only gap is a slightly thin account of what a returned path actually contains.

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 description coverage is 100% with 8 documented parameters, so the schema already explains from/to syntax, direction, limit, max_depth, and the deprecated file params. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, which is the correct baseline.

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?

States a specific resource (the connection between two entities) and the return shape ('as hops'), and explicitly distinguishes itself from trace_data_flow for the single-endpoint case. It is a noun phrase rather than a verb+resource, but the intent is unambiguous next to its 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?

'One endpoint? trace_data_flow.' gives an explicit when-not condition and names the alternative tool. It does not distinguish this from other plausible siblings such as find_references or impact_analysis, but the primary routing decision is covered.

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