Skip to main content
Glama
nikolai-vysotskyi

trace-mcp

by nikolai-vysotskyi
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Local

get_change_impact

Read-onlyIdempotent

Assess the blast radius of a code change before modifying it: get a risk score, breaking changes, affected dependents, and impacted tests to decide where to edit safely.

Instructions

Full change impact report: risk score + mitigations, breaking change detection, enriched dependents (complexity, coverage, exports), module groups, affected tests, co-change hidden couplings. Supports diff-aware mode via symbol_ids to scope analysis to only changed symbols. Use before modifying code to understand blast radius. For quick risk assessment without full report, use assess_change_risk instead. Read-only. Returns JSON: { risk, dependents, affectedTests, breakingChanges, totalAffected }.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fqnNoFully qualified name to analyze (alternative to symbol_id)
depthNoMax traversal depth (default 3)
file_pathYesRelative file path to analyze
symbol_idYesSymbol ID to analyze
symbol_idsNoDiff-aware: only analyze impact of these specific symbols (e.g. from get_changed_symbols)
max_dependentsNoCap on returned dependents (default 200)
decorator_filterNoFilter dependents to only those with this decorator/annotation/attribute (e.g. "Route", "Transactional", "csrf_protect")

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv3.3.0
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
  2. Added
  3. Removedv1.38.0
  4. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.35.1
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / required
      Added value: +[
+  "file_path",
+  "symbol_id"
+]
  5. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, and the description reinforces this with 'Read-only.' It adds behavioral value by describing diff-aware mode via symbol_ids and the top-level JSON return shape, helping the agent anticipate output and scope.

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 compact and front-loaded, opening with 'Full change impact report' and then listing concrete outputs. Every sentence carries distinct signal: purpose, mode, usage timing, alternative, safety, and return shape, with no filler.

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 a complex analysis tool, the description covers purpose, when to use, alternative, read-only behavior, diff-aware mode, and a summary of the JSON response. It doesn't document every returned field, but the listed keys plus full schema coverage give enough context for correct invocation and interpretation.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 7 parameters. The description's mention of symbol_ids for diff-aware analysis adds slight context, but the schema already describes this behavior, so the description does not significantly elevate parameter understanding.

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 clearly states the tool produces a full change impact report, enumerating risk score, mitigations, breaking changes, enriched dependents, module groups, affected tests, and hidden couplings. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from assess_change_risk, making its purpose unmistakable even among sibling tools.

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?

It gives an explicit usage directive: 'Use before modifying code to understand blast radius.' It also names a lighter alternative, assess_change_risk, for quick risk assessment, so an agent can decide when this heavier tool is warranted.

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

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/nikolai-vysotskyi/trace-mcp'

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