better-code-review-graph

Query

query

Read-onlyIdempotent

Query a code knowledge graph to find relationships, search code symbols, and analyze the impact of changes. Use actions like impact, diff, and search to get targeted context for code reviews.

Instructions

Query the code knowledge graph for relationships, search, and impact analysis. Actions: query (pattern, target), search (search_query), impact (changed_files|base), large_functions (min_lines), spot_check (n -- random callsite snippets from last callers_of/callees_of/inheritors_of/importers_of result), renamed_in_diff (base -- symbols whose callsite line shifted vs base ref), diff (from_sha, to_sha -- nodes added/removed/modified between two commit SHAs). Use help tool for full docs.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`n`	No
`base`	No	HEAD~1
`kind`	No
`repo`	No
`as_of`	No
`limit`	No
`action`	Yes
`target`	No
`to_sha`	No
`pattern`	No
`from_sha`	No
`languages`	No
`max_depth`	No
`min_lines`	No
`repo_root`	No
`max_results`	No
`search_query`	No
`changed_files`	No
`context_lines`	No
`file_path_pattern`	No
`max_payload_bytes`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

Changed4 schema fields changedv3.20.0Jul 14, 2026
- addedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +true
```
- removedOutput schema / properties
```
Removed value: -{
-  "result": {
-    "type": "string"
-  }
-}
```
- removedOutput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "result"
-]
```
- removedOutput schema / x-fastmcp-wrap-result
```
Removed value: -true
```
First observedv3.19.0Jul 4, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, and the description aligns by presenting read-like actions (query, search, impact, diff). The description adds behavioral detail per action (e.g., 'spot_check returns random callsite snippets'), enhancing transparency beyond annotations.

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?

The description is information-dense, packing multiple actions and their arguments into a single paragraph without excessive verbosity. It is not structured with sections but remains focused. The mention of 'help' for full docs prevents over-expansion.

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 21 parameters and high complexity, the description provides a high-level overview of actions but lacks depth on many parameters. An output schema exists, which helps, but the description still leaves gaps regarding parameter usage and edge cases.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It maps some parameters to actions (e.g., pattern, target for query), but many parameters (kind, repo, as_of, limit, languages, etc.) remain unexplained, limiting practical guidance.

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 queries a 'code knowledge graph' and lists specific actions like query, search, impact, etc. It distinguishes itself from siblings like config or help by detailing unique functionalities, though it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'graph' tool.

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 lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lists actions but does not specify when to use a particular action or when not to use the tool. The only direction is 'Use help tool for full docs,' which defers responsibility.

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

Latest Blog Posts

Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 25, 2026.
mcp
Agent Identity
OAuth 2.1
Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an Intern
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 2, 2026.
Agent Identity
MCP Security
OAuth Delegation
Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)
By Om-Shree-0709 on June 30, 2026.
Agentic Ai
Prompt Injection
WebAssembly

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/n24q02m/better-code-review-graph'

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