Skip to main content
Glama
tenatarika

vex

by tenatarika
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

reachable

Find all symbols that transitively call a target to assess full upstream impact before changing a function, computing the call-graph closure in one call.

Instructions

Every symbol that transitively calls target (the full upstream blast radius). Prefer over repeated callers walks when assessing the impact of changing a function — reachable does the closure in one call. Requires a v4 index with call graph.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax results
targetYesExact symbol name whose callers (direct + transitive) you want.
excludeNoBlacklist results by path glob; wins over include (repeatable)
includeNoWhitelist results by path glob, gitignore syntax (repeatable)
max_hopsNoMaximum hops to walk back from target
workspaceNoMulti-repo: fan out across every repo declared in the nearest `.vex-workspace.toml` (set `project_root` at or above it — the manifest is found by walking up). Results become an object `{workspace, repos:[...]}` grouped by repo, NOT the flat per-tool array — branch on shape. `why` is ignored in workspace mode (single-repo only).
auto_updateNoAuto-update the index if stale, or bootstrap it if missing, before running (default: true)
async_updateNoWith auto_update, refresh a stale index in the background instead of waiting for it: results come from the index already on disk and _meta.vex.dev/stale says so (default: false)
project_rootNoAbsolute path to the project root (defaults to the MCP working directory)
exclude_testsNoDrop test files from the results (tests/ dirs, *_test.*, test_*.py, *.spec.ts, __tests__/, tests.rs, ...; same set as tests_for). Composes with include/exclude. Path-based only: Rust unit tests inside a `#[cfg(test)] mod tests` block of a non-test file are not excluded.
no_stale_checkNoSkip the staleness check that runs before each call; assumes the index is fresh. Redundant when `auto_update` is true.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.27.3

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it discloses a real prerequisite: 'Requires a v4 index with call graph', which is not derivable from the schema. It does not, however, cover the workspace-mode shape change, staleness/auto-update semantics, or truncation-by-limit behavior, all of which live only in schema property text.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the definition and scope, then the routing rule, then the prerequisite. No filler and every sentence earns its place.

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 an 11-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the core semantics and one hard prerequisite. The remaining behavior (workspace result shape, limit truncation, stale-index handling) is fully documented in the schema, so coverage is adequate though not rich.

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 schema already documents all 11 parameters (including the workspace shape change and exclude_tests path-only caveat). The description adds only the notion of transitive closure, which is really purpose rather than parameter meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Every symbol that transitively calls `target`') and immediately frames the scope as the 'full upstream blast radius', which is unambiguous. It explicitly differentiates itself from the sibling `callers` tool, so an agent can select correctly 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?

Gives explicit routing guidance: 'Prefer over repeated `callers` walks when assessing the impact of changing a function'. This names the alternative, the scenario that selects it, and the reason (closure in one call). 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