Skip to main content
Glama
jbacalso24

mimry

by jbacalso24
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

mimry_symbol

Search indexed repository symbols by name, then optionally trace callers or callees up to three levels deep to map code relationships.

Instructions

Search indexed symbols by name, falling back to file names.

Set relations to "callers" (what calls the symbol) or "callees" (what it calls), with depth 1 to 3 for how many calls away to follow. file picks one symbol when several share the name, and file may end in ":N" to pick by line; line picks the symbol that starts on that line, or else spans it. Without relations this only searches.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fileNo
lineNo
nameYes
rootNo
depthNo
relationsNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.5.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / line
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null
+}
  2. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.3.4
    • addedInput schema / properties / depth
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / file
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / relations
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null
+}
  3. First observedv0.2.1

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the depth bound (1 to 3), the meaning of the relations values, and the disambiguation rules for file/:N/line, which goes beyond the bare schema. It does not state that the operation is read-only/non-mutating, nor mention permissions, indexing requirements, or result limits.

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 the core action and free of filler; the fallback and the default-mode caveat are placed where they matter. The middle sentences about file/line disambiguation are dense and slightly run-on, but every clause carries information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description covers five of six parameters plus the traversal semantics. The unexplained root parameter and the absence of any read-vs-write statement are the remaining gaps for a six-parameter tool.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it largely does: it explains name, file (including the ':N' line suffix), line (starts-on or spans semantics), relations, and depth. The only unexplained parameter is root, whose meaning must be inferred.

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 states a specific verb+resource ("Search indexed symbols by name") and adds a fallback behavior ("falling back to file names") plus a distinct traversal mode. It does not name or contrast itself with siblings like mimry_find, mimry_related, or mimry_path, so an agent must infer the boundary from schemas alone.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It gives conditional guidance for the relations parameter ("Set relations to 'callers'... or 'callees'...") and clarifies the default mode ("Without relations this only searches"). However, it never states when to prefer this tool over mimry_find, mimry_related, or mimry_impact, so the guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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