Skip to main content
Glama
turbyho

fw-context-mcp

by turbyho
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_method_overrides

Resolve C++ virtual dispatch by showing which base-class method a method overrides and which derived classes override it, using libclang-powered vtable analysis.

Instructions

Return C++ virtual method override information — libclang-powered vtable analysis. Resolves virtual dispatch across class hierarchies: shows which base-class method this overrides, and which derived-class methods override this one. Text-based search cannot resolve virtual dispatch across translation units.

Shows what base-class method this method overrides, and what derived-class methods override this one. Built from the overrides table which is populated during fw-context index via post-processing of the inheritance graph and virtual method signatures.

For class-level inheritance, use get_inheritance_chain. For symbol details, use get_symbol_context.

Read-only. No side effects.

Args: method_name: Method name to get override information for. Use qualified name for disambiguation, e.g. 'UART_DRIVER::write'. project_root: Project root. Auto-detected if omitted. project: Project name or project_id — call list_projects to get them. Use it to ask about a project that is not the project of the current directory. It is an alternative to project_root, which takes a root path. Give one of the two, not both. variant: Build variant (multi-build project). Omit to use default_variant. One query answers for ONE build. image: Sysbuild image within the variant. Required when the variant holds several: each image is a separate program.

Returns: dict: { name, qualified_name, kind, file, line, signature, overrides: [{usr, name, qualified_name, kind, file, line}], overridden_by: [{usr, name, qualified_name, kind, file, line}] }

On failure the dict holds only ``error`` with the reason.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
imageNoSysbuild image within the variant. Required when the variant holds several: each image is a separate program.
projectNoProject name or project_id — call list_projects to get them. Use it to ask about a project that is not the project of the current directory. It is an alternative to project_root, which takes a root path. Give one of the two, not both.
variantNoBuild variant (multi-build project). Omit to use default_variant. One query answers for ONE build.
method_nameYesMethod name to get override information for. Use qualified name for disambiguation, e.g. 'UART_DRIVER::write'.
project_rootNoProject root. Auto-detected if omitted. This field also accepts a project name or a project_id, but project is the clear field for those.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.32.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / image / description
      Previous value: -"Sysbuild image name within the variant (multi-project). Omit for all images of the variant."New value: +"Sysbuild image within the variant. Required when the variant holds several: each image is a separate program."
    • addedInput schema / properties / method_name / minLength
      Added value: +1
    • changedInput schema / properties / variant / description
      Previous value: -"Build variant name (multi-project). Omit to use default_variant or fail-closed. Use '*' for all variants."New value: +"Build variant (multi-build project). Omit to use default_variant. One query answers for ONE build."
  2. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.30.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • addedInput schema / properties / project
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Project name or project_id — call list_projects to get them. Use it to ask about a project that is not the project of the current directory. It is an alternative to project_root, which takes a root path. Give one of the two, not both.",
+  "title": "Project"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / project_root / description
      Previous value: -"Project root. Auto-detected if omitted."New value: +"Project root. Auto-detected if omitted. This field also accepts a project name or a project_id, but project is the clear field for those."
  3. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.25.3
    • addedInput schema / properties / image
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Sysbuild image name within the variant (multi-project). Omit for all images of the variant.",
+  "title": "Image"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / variant
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Build variant name (multi-project). Omit to use default_variant or fail-closed. Use '*' for all variants.",
+  "title": "Variant"
+}
  4. Addedv0.7.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explicitly declares 'Read-only. No side effects', and discloses the underlying data source (the overrides table populated during indexing) and failure behavior (dict holds only error). It could go further by stating prerequisites like index freshness, but the provided behavioral disclosures are strong.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is well-structured with Args and Returns sections, but it contains a near-verbatim redundancy: 'Shows what base-class method this method overrides...' appears in both the first and second paragraphs. This repetition wastes space. Other sentences earn their place, but the duplication prevents a higher score.

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?

Given there is no output schema, the description compensates by detailing the return dict structure and failure mode. It covers all 5 parameters, names alternatives, and explains the index-derived nature of the data. Minor gaps like performance or index prerequisites exist, but for a tool of this complexity it is largely complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description's Args section largely duplicates the schema descriptions (e.g., qualified name example, project vs project_root guidance), adding little beyond what the input schema already states. No additional parameter clarification is provided, so a 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description states a specific verb ('Return'), a specific resource ('C++ virtual method override information'), and explains the core mechanics (libclang-powered vtable analysis, resolving virtual dispatch across class hierarchies). It clearly differentiates itself from textual search and names sibling tools for alternative purposes, making it unambiguous.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: 'For class-level inheritance, use get_inheritance_chain. For symbol details, use get_symbol_context.' It also explains why this tool is needed ('Text-based search cannot resolve virtual dispatch across translation units') and covers project selection constraints, enabling an agent to decide when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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