Trace all functions and methods that invoke a specified symbol in a codebase to map callers and dependencies.
Find all functions and methods in the codebase that invoke a given function or method.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| symbol_name | Yes | The function or method name to trace callers for. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It conveys that this is a read-only search across the codebase, but does not disclose whether callers are direct vs transitive, whether results are paginated, or any indexing prerequisites.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; every word contributes to defining the operation and its target.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and target. Minor gaps around indexing prerequisites and direct/transitive scope remain, but nothing essential to correct invocation is missing.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so symbol_name is already documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax, naming, or scoping detail beyond what the schema states, so the baseline 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Clear verb 'find' with a specific resource: functions/methods that invoke a given symbol. It defines a reverse-call lookup, which is distinguishable from find_symbol and get_outline, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with the potentially overlapping get_impact_radius.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this versus siblings like find_symbol or get_impact_radius, and no stated prerequisites (e.g. whether the codebase must be indexed first). Usage is only implied by the verb.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.