Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
citio

citio

by lawrencehui
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

investigate_codebase

Search the codebase for files, functions, or patterns matching a query to find relevant code quickly.

Instructions

Search the codebase for files, functions, or patterns related to a query

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "investigate_codebase"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesWhat to search for

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must fully disclose behavior. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, any authentication needs, rate limits, or return format. Only states it searches for items.

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?

Single sentence with no redundant information. Could be slightly more structured (e.g., listing what it returns), but remains efficient.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the basic functionality. However, it lacks information on search scope (e.g., current directory or entire repo) and return format, which are needed for complete use.

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 coverage is 100% and the parameter 'query' has a basic description. The tool description adds context (files, functions, patterns) beyond the schema, but does not compensate fully for missing behavioral details. Baseline at high coverage is 3.

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 tool searches the codebase for files, functions, or patterns related to a query. It uses a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('codebase'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like read_file (specific file) or query_logs (logs).

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., read_file, run_command). It does not specify when not to use it or provide any usage context.

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