Skip to main content
Glama
ozgurcd

gograph

by ozgurcd
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Local

gograph_path

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find and rank call chains between two Go symbols to confirm reachability, favoring exact, shorter, production paths, with optional Mermaid flowchart output.

Instructions

Find the best call chain from one symbol to another. Competing paths rank exact before possible, then shorter, production before tests, typed resolution before heuristics, with a deterministic canonical tie-breaker. The MCP server refreshes source analysis before the call. Read-only; no side effects. WHEN TO USE: To confirm reachability between non-adjacent symbols. NOT TO USE: For all transitive upstream callers (use gograph_impact). RETURNS: from, to, found, and steps[]; with mermaid=true, Mermaid flowchart text.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toYesThe target symbol name
fromYesThe starting symbol name
mermaidNoReturn Mermaid flowchart text instead of structured JSON

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.5.6
    • addedInput schema / properties / mermaid
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Return Mermaid flowchart text instead of structured JSON",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Addedv1.5.3
  3. Removedv1.5.3
  4. 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 readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine beyond-annotation context: the ranking rules (exact before possible, shorter, production before tests, typed before heuristics), the canonical tie-breaker, and that the server refreshes source analysis before the call. It does not cover error/failure behavior, which keeps it from a 5.

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-loads the purpose, then organizes ranking rules, mutation/safety note, and WHEN/NOT/RETURNS blocks. Slightly dense with the ranking sentence, but each clause carries meaning and nothing 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?

There is no output schema, so the explicit RETURNS section (from, to, found, steps[], plus Mermaid text when mermaid=true) fills that gap. Combined with usage routing and ranking 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 all three parameters are already documented in the schema. The only added hint is 'with mermaid=true, Mermaid flowchart text,' which largely restates the mermaid parameter's own schema description. Baseline 3 when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 the best call chain from one symbol to another.' It also distinguishes itself from the sibling gograph_impact by name, so an agent can route correctly without opening schemas.

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?

Contains explicit WHEN TO USE ('confirm reachability between non-adjacent symbols') and NOT TO USE ('for all transitive upstream callers, use gograph_impact') sections, naming the alternative and the condition that selects it. Nothing is left to inference.

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