Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
gograph

gograph

by ozgurcd
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Local

gograph_literals

Read-onlyIdempotent

Locate every composite-literal initialization site for a named Go struct to scope migration blast radius before adding a required field; returns file paths and line numbers.

Instructions

Find every composite-literal initialization site for a named Go struct — all locations where Foo{...} syntax is used to construct the struct. 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: Before adding a required field to a struct — every site returned will fail to compile if the new field has no default; run this first to scope the migration blast radius. NOT TO USE: For finding string or integer magic values (use gograph_envs or grep for those); for factory functions that return the struct (use gograph_constructors). RETURNS: All file paths and line numbers where the named struct is composite-initialized; empty when the struct has no direct initialization sites.

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 name of the struct (e.g., 'User')
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. Addedv1.5.4
  4. Removedv1.5.3
  5. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, but the description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the server performs a freshness check and refresh in the requested analysis mode, and precise/precise_fallback graphs retry CHA/SSA after source changes, which explains possible latency and result consistency. The one redundant sentence is 'Read-only; no side effects,' which merely restates the annotations, but it does not undermine the added value.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, then cleanly divides into WHEN TO USE, NOT TO USE and RETURNS sections, making it easy to scan. It is somewhat longer than necessary — the freshness/CHA/SSA sentence is implementation detail that could be trimmed — but no section is padding.

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?

Although no output schema exists, the RETURNS section describes exactly what comes back (file paths and line numbers, empty when the struct has no direct initialization sites), and pagination is handled by limit/cursor in the schema. Combined with explicit exclusions and freshness behavior, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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 baseline is 3; every parameter including root, limit, cursor, intention and session_id is already documented in the schema. The description only clarifies the meaning of 'struct' implicitly via 'named struct' and does not add format or scoping detail beyond what the schema states.

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 — find every composite-literal initialization site for a named Go struct — and even paraphrases the syntax (Foo{...}) so the agent knows exactly what code pattern is matched. It explicitly contrasts itself with gograph_constructors, which handles factory functions, so the two siblings are distinguishable without opening either 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 scenario (before adding a required field, to scope migration blast radius) and an explicit NOT TO USE clause naming the alternatives for adjacent cases (gograph_envs or grep for magic values, gograph_constructors for factory functions). Both the positive and negative routing conditions are spelled out.

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