The 'code-review-graph' tool is declared in .mcp.json but no actual tool definition, schema, or implementation is visible in the provided source. The tool name lacks a clear action verb (should be 'analyze_code_review_graph' or 'compute_blast_radius'). The description in .mcp.json is present (54 chars) but vague, it mentions 'Tree-sitter AST parsing' and 'blast-radius' without explaining what inputs the tool accepts, what outputs it returns, or how an LLM should invoke it. No input schema, parameter descriptions, or output schema are documented. The server is a bash/shell wrapper around a Python package ('uvx code-review-graph serve') with no visible tool registration logic, parameter validation, or error handling. This appears to be a configuration file for a third-party tool, not a fully-defined MCP server.

• Rename tool to start with an action verb: 'analyze_code_review_graph', 'compute_blast_radius', or 'generate_impact_analysis'.
• Expand description to 100 - 200 chars explaining: (1) what the tool does, (2) when to use it (e.g., 'after a code change to understand affected modules'), (3) what it returns (e.g., 'list of impacted files and functions').
• Define input schema with required parameters: file_path (string, description: 'path to the file changed'), optional: include_tests (boolean), max_depth (integer, 1 - 10). Add descriptions for each.
• Document output schema: return an object with 'impacted_files' (array of strings), 'impacted_functions' (array of objects with name and line_number), 'blast_radius_score' (0 - 100), and 'summary' (string).
• Add error handling: if file not found, return 'File not found: <path>. Ensure the path is relative to the repository root.' If AST parsing fails, return 'Could not parse file: <reason>. Ensure the file is valid Python/JavaScript/etc.'