See what breaks before you break it. Codebase intelligence for AI assistants.
Nodestradamus has 9 well-named tools following verb_noun patterns (project_scout, analyze_deps, get_impact, etc.), all with READ_ONLY risk classification. However, critical gaps prevent a higher score: (1) Input schemas are visible but INCOMPLETE, most tools accept only repo_path with minimal parameter detail; depth and threshold parameters exist but lack bounds, validation rules, or constraints in descriptions. (2) Descriptions are GENERIC and lack WHEN-to-use guidance, 'Scout the project structure' (38 chars) and 'Build and analyze the dependency graph' (37 chars) are below the 50-200 char baseline and fail to explain what the LLM should do with results. (3) Output schemas are UNDOCUMENTED, no specification of what these tools return, forcing LLMs to guess at response structure. (4) Error handling is absent, no guidance on what happens when repo_path is invalid, git history is unavailable, or embedding models fail. (5) Tool #5 (codebase_health) and tools #6-9 have INFERRED definitions only, visible in file references but NOT explicitly registered in callable handler code we can inspect. Schema quality is further hampered by missing bounds (depth: int with no min/max), missing enums (threshold: 0-1 but not declared as constrained), and no documentation of what structure is returned.
Analyze git commit history to find files that are frequently changed together, revealing hidden coupling.
Build and analyze the dependency graph for a repository, extracting functions, classes, imports and their relationships.
Analyze documentation in the codebase and validate references to code elements.
Evaluate the overall health and quality of the codebase including dead code, coupling, and complexity metrics.
Identify unused functions, classes, and orphaned files in the codebase.
Find similar or duplicate code sections in the codebase using embedding-based analysis.
Analyze the impact of changes to a file, showing what code depends on it and what it depends on.
Output schemas completely undocumented for all 9 tools
Tool descriptions are too short and lack WHEN-to-use guidance
Numeric and constrained parameters lack bounds and validation rules
Five tools have inferred definitions not visible in provided source code
Inferred effective spec: <=2025-11-25.
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-22 | F | 45 | <=2025-11-25 | v2 |
| 2026-03-09 | F | 34 | 2024-11-05+ | v1 |
Scout the project structure and gather basic metadata about the codebase.
Search the codebase for semantically similar code using embeddings and natural language queries.
No error handling or recovery guidance
Parameter descriptions are generic and lack format constraints