Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
gograph

gograph

by ozgurcd
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Local

gograph_constructors

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find all factory and constructor functions that return a named Go struct, so you can locate canonical construction paths and update every initialization site safely.

Instructions

Find all factory and constructor functions that instantiate and return a named Go struct (functions whose return type includes the struct name). The MCP server checks freshness before this call and refreshes in the current requested analysis mode; precise and precise_fallback graphs retry CHA/SSA after source changes. Read-only; no side effects. WHEN TO USE: When looking for the canonical way to create a struct, or before modifying struct initialization to ensure all construction paths are updated. NOT TO USE: For direct composite-literal sites (use gograph_literals); for struct fields (use gograph_fields). RETURNS: List of constructor function names with signatures, package paths, and file locations; empty when no factory functions are found.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rootNoAbsolute path of the checkout you are working in (your cwd or git worktree). Must be this server's repository or one of its git worktrees; the answer then comes from that checkout's own graph. A path elsewhere is refused. Alias: cwd. Omit only when the configured checkout is the one you mean.
limitNoMaximum rows per page; the byte budget may return fewer.
cursorNoOpaque next_cursor for the same graph snapshot and result selection.
structYesThe exact name of the target Go struct to find constructors for (e.g., 'User', 'Config')
intentionNoTechnical rationale, required for analytical calls selecting an active session.
session_idNoCaller selector returned by session_create. Omission means an independent caller; never inherits server environment or another caller's session.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.7.18
    • addedInput schema / properties / intention
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Technical rationale, required for analytical calls selecting an active session.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / root
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Absolute path of the checkout you are working in (your cwd or git worktree). Must be this server's repository or one of its git worktrees; the answer then comes from that checkout's own graph. A path elsewhere is refused. Alias: cwd. Omit only when the configured checkout is the one you mean.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / session_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Caller selector returned by session_create. Omission means an independent caller; never inherits server environment or another caller's session.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.7.5
    • addedInput schema / properties / cursor
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Opaque next_cursor for the same graph snapshot and result selection.",
+  "maxLength": 128,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 100,
+  "description": "Maximum rows per page; the byte budget may return fewer.",
+  "maximum": 200,
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  3. Addedv1.5.3
  4. Removedv1.5.3
  5. Changed1 schema field changedv1.4.70
    • changedInput schema / properties / struct / description
      Previous value: -"The name of the struct (e.g., 'User')"New value: +"The exact name of the target Go struct to find constructors for (e.g., 'User', 'Config')"
  6. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/destructiveHint, so the description's "Read-only; no side effects" is redundant, but it adds genuinely non-structured behavior: the server checks freshness before the call, refreshes into the requested analysis mode, and precise/precise_fallback graphs retry CHA/SSA after source changes. That is useful operational context an agent would otherwise not know; it stops short of discussing cost/latency of the re-analysis.

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 definition, then clearly delimited WHEN TO USE / NOT TO USE / RETURNS blocks, so it scans fast. The freshness/retry sentence is somewhat dense jargon and could be one clause shorter, keeping it just below maximum.

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?

For a 6-parameter, read-only query tool with no output schema, it covers what is found, how matches are defined, when to prefer siblings, that results can be empty, and the return shape (names, signatures, package paths, file locations). Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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 3 is the baseline, but the description adds matching semantics the schema does not carry: the struct is identified by appearing in a function's return type, and results are empty when no factory is found. It still says nothing extra about root, cursor, limit, session_id, or intention, which the schema already documents.

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?

"Find all factory and constructor functions that instantiate and return a named Go struct" gives a specific verb plus a precise resource definition, and the parenthetical even states the matching rule (return type includes the struct name). It explicitly names the two nearest siblings it is not (gograph_literals, gograph_fields), so the agent can disambiguate without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Provides an explicit WHEN TO USE section with a concrete scenario (finding the canonical construction path, or before changing struct initialization) and an explicit NOT TO USE section routing to gograph_literals for composite literals and gograph_fields for fields. Symmetric when/when-not with named alternatives is the top of this scale.

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