repomap-mcp
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": true
} |
| logging | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| repo_mapA | Generate a ranked repository map of code definitions via PageRank over cross-file reference graphs. Useful for understanding codebase structure, discovering entry points, or finding code related to specific files or identifiers. |
| search_identifiersA | Search for code identifiers (functions, classes, variables) across the repository via Tree-sitter AST analysis. Returns matching definitions and references with code context. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: repo_map provides a high-level structural overview via PageRank, while search_identifiers finds specific code symbols. There is no overlap in functionality, so an agent can easily choose the right one.
Both tool names use a consistent verb_noun pattern (repo_map, search_identifiers) with clear verbs describing the action and nouns describing the target. The naming is predictable and descriptive.
With only two tools, the server feels thin but not inadequate given its focused purpose on codebase mapping and identifier search. The scope is narrow enough that two tools may suffice, though additional tools like file listing or definition retrieval could be expected.
The server covers two core needs (structural overview and symbol search), but is missing common operations like viewing file contents, getting code definitions at a point, or listing references for a symbol. An agent may hit dead ends if it needs more detailed code navigation beyond identifiers.