Skip to main content
Glama
gregordadera

aicb-roslyn-mcp

by gregordadera
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

Build a Call Graph

call_graph
Read-onlyIdempotent

Build a depth-limited call hierarchy from a C# method name to trace project-internal callees or callers and return caller-callee edges for impact analysis.

Instructions

Build a depth-limited call graph rooted at a method NAME. direction='callees' follows project-internal calls outward; direction='callers' follows the inverse (who calls this). Returns (caller, callee) edges using method-lookup keys, cycle-safe and capped at 500 edges (truncated flag). Rooted at the name, NOT at one symbol: EVERY same-named declaration in the solution is a root and the graph is their union, so a common name (e.g. 'ExecuteAsync') can pull in unrelated members and inflate the payload. 'rootedAt' lists the declarations actually walked - check it when the result looks too big (then re-query a rarer name) and when it is empty (the name resolved to nothing, which an empty edge list alone does not tell you).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
depthNoMax traversal depth (1-10). Default 2.
methodYesThe root method's name.
directionNo'callees' (default) or 'callers'.callees
sessionIdYesThe session_id returned by analyze_solution. Also takes an absolute .sln/.slnx/.slnf path, analyzed on first use.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.5.46513
    • changedInput schema / properties / sessionId / description
      Previous value: -"The session_id returned by analyze_solution."New value: +"The session_id returned by analyze_solution. Also takes an absolute .sln/.slnx/.slnf path, analyzed on first use."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare the safe read-only/idempotent profile, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: the 500-edge cap with a truncated flag, cycle-safe traversal, edge key format, and the critical name-resolution behavior (every same-named declaration is a root, unioned together). This is exactly the kind of behavior an agent cannot infer from annotations.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then progressively adds depth-limit, truncation, and root-resolution caveats. Dense but every sentence carries information; only the length keeps it from a 5.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema exists, so the description must cover return values, and it does: (caller, callee) edges, lookup keys, cycle safety, truncation flag, and the 'rootedAt' diagnostic. Complete enough for an agent to call and interpret results correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: it explains the semantic difference between direction values and, crucially, that 'method' resolves to all same-named declarations rather than one symbol, which materially changes how the parameter should be chosen.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Build a depth-limited call graph rooted at a method NAME') and immediately distinguishes direction modes ('callees' vs 'callers'). An agent can tell exactly what this produces without opening the schema.

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?

Gives clear operational guidance: which direction to choose, and what to do when the result is too big (re-query a rarer name) or when 'rootedAt' is empty. It does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools (e.g. find_usages, impact_of_change) for comparison, so it stops short of full when-not routing.

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