Skip to main content
Glama
nikolai-vysotskyi

trace-mcp

by nikolai-vysotskyi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

get_change_impact

Read-onlyIdempotent

Assess change impact before modifying code: get risk score, breaking changes, affected tests, dependents, and hidden couplings with mitigations.

Instructions

Full change impact report: risk score + mitigations, breaking change detection, enriched dependents (complexity, coverage, exports), module groups, affected tests, co-change hidden couplings. Pass symbol_ids to scope to changed symbols. Use before modifying code. For a quick risk score alone use assess_change_risk; for who-calls-what use get_call_graph. compact pages results; bundle recalls. Read-only. Returns JSON: { risk, dependents, affectedTests, breakingChanges, totalAffected }.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fqnNoFully qualified name to analyze (alternative to symbol_id)
depthNoMax traversal depth (default 3)
bundleNoHandle; @N = page N.
compactNoPaged recall (opt-in).
file_pathNoRelative file path to analyze
symbol_idNoSymbol ID to analyze
symbol_idsNoDiff-aware: only analyze impact of these specific symbols (e.g. from get_changed_symbols)
max_dependentsNoCap on returned dependents (default 200)
decorator_filterNoFilter dependents to only those with this decorator/annotation/attribute (e.g. "Route", "Transactional", "csrf_protect")

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv3.31.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / bundle
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Handle; @N = page N.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / compact
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Paged recall (opt-in).",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv3.22.0
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "file_path",
-  "symbol_id"
-]
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv3.3.0
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
  4. Added
  5. Removedv1.38.0
  6. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.35.1
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / required
      Added value: +[
+  "file_path",
+  "symbol_id"
+]
  7. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool read-only and idempotent, and the description explicitly states 'Read-only.' It adds useful behavioral detail beyond annotations: paging via compact, bundle recall semantics, and the returned JSON shape. It doesn't overstate side effects or contradict the safety hints.

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?

The description is dense and front-loaded; the first sentence states the core value, and later sentences cover usage, alternatives, paging, and output. Minor terseness like 'compact pages results; bundle recalls' could be clearer, but there is no filler or redundancy.

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 a complex 9-parameter tool with no output schema, the description does enough by summarizing the report contents and the main return fields. It does not fully explain how the multiple locator params (fqn, symbol_id, file_path, symbol_ids) interact or what happens with no params, leaving a small gap in an otherwise complete picture.

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%, so the structured parameters already define fqn, depth, bundle, symbol_ids, max_dependents, decorator_filter, etc. The description adds guidance for symbol_ids as a diff-aware scope and mentions compact/bundle, but it does not materially enrich the parameters beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 defines a concrete deliverable ('Full change impact report') and enumerates its contents: risk score, mitigations, breaking-change detection, enriched dependents, module groups, affected tests, and co-change hidden couplings. It also contrasts itself with get_call_graph, so an agent can distinguish it from the closest sibling.

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?

It gives an explicit trigger ('Use before modifying code'), scoping advice ('Pass symbol_ids to scope to changed symbols'), and routes quick risk checks to assess_change_risk and call-graph queries to get_call_graph. However, assess_change_risk is not present in the provided sibling list, which slightly weakens the referral; still, the conditions of use are clear.

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