Skip to main content
Glama
wrale

mcp-server-tree-sitter

by wrale

get_node_types

Retrieve detailed descriptions of node types for a specified programming language, enabling structured code analysis and context management using tree-sitter.

Instructions

Get descriptions of common node types for a language.

    Args:
        language: Language name

    Returns:
        Dictionary of node types and descriptions
    

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
languageYes

Implementation Reference

  • MCP tool handler and registration for 'get_node_types'. This decorated function defines the tool's input (language: str) and output (Dict[str, str]), and delegates execution to describe_node_types.
    @mcp_server.tool()
    def get_node_types(language: str) -> Dict[str, str]:
        """Get descriptions of common node types for a language.
    
        Args:
            language: Language name
    
        Returns:
            Dictionary of node types and descriptions
        """
        from ..tools.query_builder import describe_node_types
    
        return describe_node_types(language)
  • Core implementation providing hardcoded descriptions of common Tree-sitter node types for supported languages (Python, JavaScript).
    def describe_node_types(language: str) -> Dict[str, str]:
        """
        Get descriptions of common node types for a language.
    
        Args:
            language: Language identifier
    
        Returns:
            Dictionary of node type -> description
        """
        # This would ideally be generated from tree-sitter grammar definitions
        descriptions = {
            "python": {
                "module": "The root node of a Python file",
                "function_definition": "A function definition with name and params",
                # Shortened for line length
                "class_definition": "A class definition with name and body",
                "import_statement": "An import statement",
                "import_from_statement": "A from ... import ... statement",
                "assignment": "An assignment statement",
                "call": "A function call with function name and arguments",
                "identifier": "An identifier (name)",
                "string": "A string literal",
                "integer": "An integer literal",
                "float": "A floating-point literal",
                "block": "A block of code (indented statements)",
                "if_statement": "An if statement with condition and body",
                "for_statement": "A for loop with target, iterable, and body",
                "while_statement": "A while loop with condition and body",
            },
            "javascript": {
                "program": "The root node of a JavaScript file",
                "function_declaration": "A function declaration with name and params",
                "arrow_function": "An arrow function with parameters and body",
                "class_declaration": "A class declaration with name and body",
                "import_statement": "An import statement",
                "export_statement": "An export statement",
                "variable_declaration": "A variable declaration",
                "call_expression": "A function call with function and arguments",
                "identifier": "An identifier (name)",
                "string": "A string literal",
                "number": "A numeric literal",
                "statement_block": "A block of statements",
                "if_statement": "An if statement with condition and consequence",
                "for_statement": "A for loop",
                "while_statement": "A while loop with condition and body",
            },
            # Add more languages...
        }
    
        return descriptions.get(language, {})
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool returns a 'Dictionary of node types and descriptions', which gives some output context, but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or whether it's a read-only operation. This is a significant gap for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

The description is appropriately sized and front-loaded: the first sentence clearly states the purpose, followed by concise 'Args' and 'Returns' sections. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it efficient and well-structured.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It covers the purpose and parameter semantics but lacks usage guidelines and detailed behavioral context. Without an output schema, it hints at the return format but doesn't fully explain the dictionary structure, leaving some gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description adds meaningful context for the single parameter: 'language: Language name'. Since the schema description coverage is 0% (the schema only provides a title 'Language' and type 'string'), the description compensates by specifying the parameter's role in fetching node types for that language. This is sufficient for the one parameter, earning a high score.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get descriptions of common node types for a language.' It specifies the verb ('Get'), resource ('descriptions of common node types'), and scope ('for a language'), making the function unambiguous. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_ast' or 'get_symbols', which might also relate to language analysis, so it falls short of a perfect score.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions the 'language' parameter but does not specify contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions. For example, it does not clarify if this should be used before or after tools like 'get_ast' or 'analyze_project', leaving usage unclear.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Related Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/wrale/mcp-server-tree-sitter'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server