SonAIengine

graph-tool-call

Community SonAIengine
Updated

Graph-based tool retrieval for LLM agents — 248 tools → 82% accuracy, 79% fewer tokens. Zero dependencies. OpenAPI / MCP / LangChain.

graph-tool-call

LLM agents can't fit thousands of tool definitions into context.Vector search finds similar tools, but misses the workflow they belong to.graph-tool-call builds a tool graph and retrieves the right chain — not just one match.

Baseline (all tools) graph-tool-call
248 tools (K8s API) 12% accuracy 82% accuracy
Token usage 8,192 tokens 1,699 tokens (79% reduction)
50 tools (GitHub API) 100% accuracy 90% accuracy, 88% fewer tokens

Measured with qwen3:4b (4-bit) — full benchmark below

PyPILicense: MITPython 3.10+CIZero Dependencies

English · 한국어 · 中文 · 日本語

The Problem

LLM agents need tools. But as tool count grows, two things break:

  1. Context overflow — 248 Kubernetes API endpoints = 8,192 tokens of tool definitions. The LLM chokes and accuracy drops to 12%.
  2. Vector search misses workflows — Searching "cancel my order" finds cancelOrder, but the actual flow is listOrders → getOrder → cancelOrder → processRefund. Vector search returns one tool; you need the chain.

graph-tool-call solves both. It models tool relationships as a graph, retrieves multi-step workflows via hybrid search (BM25 + graph traversal + embedding + MCP annotations), and cuts token usage by 64–91% while maintaining or improving accuracy.

At a Glance

What you get How
Workflow-aware retrieval Graph edges encode PRECEDES, REQUIRES, COMPLEMENTARY relations
Hybrid search BM25 + graph traversal + embedding + MCP annotations, fused via wRRF
Zero dependencies Core runs on Python stdlib only — add extras as needed
Any tool source Auto-ingest from OpenAPI / Swagger / MCP / Python functions
History-aware Previously called tools are demoted; next-step tools are boosted
MCP Proxy 172 tools across servers → 3 meta-tools, saving ~1,200 tokens/turn

Why Not Just Vector Search?

Scenario Vector-only graph-tool-call
"cancel my order" Returns cancelOrder listOrders → getOrder → cancelOrder → processRefund
"read and save file" Returns read_file read_file + write_file (COMPLEMENTARY relation)
"delete old records" Returns any tool matching "delete" Destructive tools ranked first via MCP annotations
"now cancel it" (after listing orders) No context from history Demotes used tools, boosts next-step tools
Multiple Swagger specs with overlapping tools Duplicate tools in results Cross-source auto-deduplication
1,200 API endpoints Slow, noisy results Categorized + graph traversal for precise retrieval

How It Works

OpenAPI / MCP / Python functions → Ingest → Build tool graph → Hybrid retrieve → Agent

Example: User says "cancel my order and process a refund"

Vector search finds cancelOrder. But the actual workflow is:

                    ┌──────────┐
          PRECEDES  │listOrders│  PRECEDES
         ┌─────────┤          ├──────────┐
         ▼         └──────────┘          ▼
   ┌──────────┐                    ┌───────────┐
   │ getOrder │                    │cancelOrder│
   └──────────┘                    └─────┬─────┘
                                        │ COMPLEMENTARY
                                        ▼
                                 ┌──────────────┐
                                 │processRefund │
                                 └──────────────┘

graph-tool-call returns the entire chain, not just one tool. Retrieval combines four signals via weighted Reciprocal Rank Fusion (wRRF):

  • BM25 — keyword matching
  • Graph traversal — relation-based expansion (PRECEDES, REQUIRES, COMPLEMENTARY)
  • Embedding similarity — semantic search (optional, any provider)
  • MCP annotations — read-only / destructive / idempotent hints

Installation

The core package has zero dependencies — just Python standard library.Install only what you need:

pip install graph-tool-call                    # core (BM25 + graph) — no dependencies
pip install graph-tool-call[embedding]         # + embedding, cross-encoder reranker
pip install graph-tool-call[openapi]           # + YAML support for OpenAPI specs
pip install graph-tool-call[mcp]              # + MCP server mode
pip install graph-tool-call[all]               # everything
All extras
Extra Installs When to use
openapi pyyaml YAML OpenAPI specs
embedding numpy Semantic search (connect to Ollama/OpenAI/vLLM)
embedding-local numpy, sentence-transformers Local sentence-transformers models
similarity rapidfuzz Duplicate detection
langchain langchain-core LangChain integration
visualization pyvis, networkx HTML graph export, GraphML
dashboard dash, dash-cytoscape Interactive dashboard
lint ai-api-lint Auto-fix bad API specs
mcp mcp MCP server mode
pip install graph-tool-call[lint]
pip install graph-tool-call[similarity]
pip install graph-tool-call[visualization]
pip install graph-tool-call[dashboard]
pip install graph-tool-call[langchain]

Quick Start

Try it in 30 seconds (no install needed)

uvx graph-tool-call search "user authentication" \
  --source https://petstore.swagger.io/v2/swagger.json
Query: "user authentication"
Source: https://petstore.swagger.io/v2/swagger.json (19 tools)
Results (5):

  1. getUserByName
     Get user by user name
  2. deleteUser
     Delete user
  3. createUser
     Create user
  4. loginUser
     Logs user into the system
  5. updateUser
     Updated user

Python API

from graph_tool_call import ToolGraph

# Build a tool graph from the official Petstore API
tg = ToolGraph.from_url(
    "https://petstore3.swagger.io/api/v3/openapi.json",
    cache="petstore.json",
)

print(tg)
# → ToolGraph(tools=19, nodes=22, edges=100)

# Search for tools
tools = tg.retrieve("create a new pet", top_k=5)
for t in tools:
    print(f"{t.name}: {t.description}")

# Search with workflow guidance
results = tg.retrieve_with_scores("process an order", top_k=5)
for r in results:
    print(f"{r.tool.name} [{r.confidence}]")
    for rel in r.relations:
        print(f"  → {rel.hint}")

# Execute an API directly (OpenAPI tools)
result = tg.execute(
    "addPet", {"name": "Buddy", "status": "available"},
    base_url="https://petstore3.swagger.io/api/v3",
)

MCP Server (Claude Code, Cursor, Windsurf, etc.)

Run as an MCP server — any MCP-compatible agent can use tool search with just a config entry:

// .mcp.json
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "tool-search": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": ["graph-tool-call[mcp]", "serve",
               "--source", "https://api.example.com/openapi.json"]
    }
  }
}

The server exposes 6 tools: search_tools, get_tool_schema, execute_tool, list_categories, graph_info, load_source.

Search results include workflow guidance — relations between tools and suggested execution order:

{
  "tools": [
    {"name": "createOrder", "relations": [
      {"target": "getOrder", "type": "precedes", "hint": "Call this tool before getOrder"}
    ]},
    {"name": "getOrder", "prerequisites": ["createOrder"]}
  ],
  "workflow": {"suggested_order": ["createOrder", "getOrder", "updateOrderStatus"]}
}

MCP Proxy (aggregate multiple MCP servers)

When you have many MCP servers, their tool names pile up in every LLM turn.MCP Proxy bundles them behind a single server — 172 tools → 3 meta-tools, saving ~1,200 tokens per turn.

Step 1. Create backends.json with your existing MCP servers:

// ~/backends.json
{
  "backends": {
    "playwright": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["@playwright/mcp", "--headless"]
    },
    "filesystem": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "@anthropic/mcp-filesystem", "/home"]
    },
    "my-api": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": ["some-mcp-server"],
      "env": { "API_KEY": "sk-..." }
    }
  },
  "top_k": 10,
  "cache_path": "~/.cache/mcp-proxy-cache.json"
}

Embedding is optional. Add "embedding": "ollama/qwen3-embedding:0.6b" for cross-language search (requires Ollama running). Without it, BM25 keyword search still works.

Step 2. Register the proxy with Claude Code:

claude mcp add -s user tool-proxy -- \
  uvx "graph-tool-call[mcp]" proxy --config ~/backends.json

Step 3. Remove the original individual servers (so they don't duplicate):

claude mcp remove playwright -s user
claude mcp remove filesystem -s user
claude mcp remove my-api -s user

Step 4. Restart Claude Code and verify:

claude mcp list
# tool-proxy: ... - ✓ Connected
# (individual servers should be gone)

That's it. The proxy exposes search_tools, get_tool_schema, and call_backend_tool. After searching, matched tools are dynamically injected for 1-hop direct calling.

Alternative: .mcp.json config
// .mcp.json (project-level or global)
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "tool-proxy": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": ["graph-tool-call[mcp]", "proxy",
               "--config", "/path/to/backends.json"]
    }
  }
}

Direct Integration (OpenAI, Ollama, vLLM, Azure, etc.)

Use retrieve() to search, then convert to OpenAI function-calling format. Works with any OpenAI-compatible API:

from openai import OpenAI
from graph_tool_call import ToolGraph
from graph_tool_call.langchain.tools import tool_schema_to_openai_function

# Build graph from any source
tg = ToolGraph.from_url(
    "https://petstore3.swagger.io/api/v3/openapi.json",
    cache="petstore.json",
)

# Retrieve only the relevant tools for a query
tools = tg.retrieve("create a new pet", top_k=5)

# Convert to OpenAI function-calling format
openai_tools = [
    {"type": "function", "function": tool_schema_to_openai_function(t)}
    for t in tools
]

# Use with any provider — OpenAI, Azure, Ollama, vLLM, llama.cpp, etc.
client = OpenAI()  # or OpenAI(base_url="http://localhost:11434/v1") for Ollama
response = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="gpt-4o",
    tools=openai_tools,  # only 5 relevant tools instead of all 248
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "create a new pet"}],
)
Anthropic Claude API
from anthropic import Anthropic
from graph_tool_call import ToolGraph

tg = ToolGraph.from_url("https://api.example.com/openapi.json")
tools = tg.retrieve("cancel an order", top_k=5)

# Convert to Anthropic tool format
anthropic_tools = [
    {
        "name": t.name,
        "description": t.description,
        "input_schema": {
            "type": "object",
            "properties": {
                p.name: {"type": p.type, "description": p.description}
                for p in t.parameters
            },
            "required": [p.name for p in t.parameters if p.required],
        },
    }
    for t in tools
]

client = Anthropic()
response = client.messages.create(
    model="claude-sonnet-4-20250514",
    tools=anthropic_tools,
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "cancel my order"}],
    max_tokens=1024,
)

SDK Middleware (zero code changes)

Already have tool-calling code? Add one line to automatically filter tools:

from graph_tool_call import ToolGraph
from graph_tool_call.middleware import patch_openai

tg = ToolGraph.from_url("https://api.example.com/openapi.json")

patch_openai(client, graph=tg, top_k=5)  # ← add this line

# Existing code unchanged — 248 tools go in, only 5 relevant ones are sent
response = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="gpt-4o",
    tools=all_248_tools,
    messages=messages,
)
# Also works with Anthropic
from graph_tool_call.middleware import patch_anthropic
patch_anthropic(client, graph=tg, top_k=5)

LangChain Integration

pip install graph-tool-call[langchain]
from graph_tool_call import ToolGraph
from graph_tool_call.langchain import GraphToolRetriever

tg = ToolGraph.from_url("https://api.example.com/openapi.json")

# Use as a LangChain retriever — compatible with any chain/agent
retriever = GraphToolRetriever(tool_graph=tg, top_k=5)
docs = retriever.invoke("cancel an order")

for doc in docs:
    print(doc.page_content)       # "cancelOrder: Cancel an existing order"
    print(doc.metadata["tags"])   # ["order"]

Benchmark

graph-tool-call verifies two things.

  1. Can performance be maintained or improved by giving the LLM only a subset of retrieved tools?
  2. Does the retriever itself rank the correct tools within the top K?

The evaluation compared the following configurations on the same set of user requests.

  • baseline: pass all tool definitions to the LLM as-is
  • retrieve-k3 / k5 / k10: pass only the top K retrieved tools
  • + embedding / + ontology: add semantic search and LLM-based ontology enrichment on top of retrieve-k5

The model used was qwen3:4b (4-bit, Ollama).

Evaluation Metrics

  • Accuracy: Did the LLM ultimately select the correct tool?
  • Recall@K: Was the correct tool included in the top K results at the retrieval stage?
  • Avg tokens: Average tokens passed to the LLM
  • Token reduction: Token savings compared to baseline

Results at a glance

  • Small-scale APIs (19~50 tools): baseline is already strong.In this range, graph-tool-call's main value is 64~91% token savings while maintaining near-baseline accuracy.
  • Large-scale APIs (248 tools): baseline collapses to 12%.In contrast, graph-tool-call maintains 78~82% accuracy. At this scale, it's not an optimization — it's closer to a required retrieval layer.
Full pipeline comparison

How to read the metrics

  • End-to-end Accuracy: Did the LLM ultimately succeed in selecting the correct tool or performing the correct workflow?
  • Gold Tool Recall@K: Was the canonical gold tool designated as the correct answer included in the top K at the retrieval stage?
  • These two metrics measure different things, so they don't always match.
  • In particular, evaluations that accept alternative tools or equivalent workflows as correct answers may show End-to-end Accuracy that doesn't exactly match Gold Tool Recall@K.
  • baseline has no retrieval stage, so Gold Tool Recall@K does not apply.
Dataset Tools Pipeline End-to-end Accuracy Gold Tool Recall@K Avg tokens Token reduction
Petstore 19 baseline 100.0% 1,239
Petstore 19 retrieve-k3 90.0% 93.3% 305 75.4%
Petstore 19 retrieve-k5 95.0% 98.3% 440 64.4%
Petstore 19 retrieve-k10 100.0% 98.3% 720 41.9%
GitHub 50 baseline 100.0% 3,302
GitHub 50 retrieve-k3 85.0% 87.5% 289 91.3%
GitHub 50 retrieve-k5 87.5% 87.5% 398 87.9%
GitHub 50 retrieve-k10 90.0% 92.5% 662 79.9%
Mixed MCP 38 baseline 96.7% 2,741
Mixed MCP 38 retrieve-k3 86.7% 93.3% 328 88.0%
Mixed MCP 38 retrieve-k5 90.0% 96.7% 461 83.2%
Mixed MCP 38 retrieve-k10 96.7% 100.0% 826 69.9%
Kubernetes core/v1 248 baseline 12.0% 8,192
Kubernetes core/v1 248 retrieve-k5 78.0% 91.0% 1,613 80.3%
Kubernetes core/v1 248 retrieve-k5 + embedding 80.0% 94.0% 1,728 78.9%
Kubernetes core/v1 248 retrieve-k5 + ontology 82.0% 96.0% 1,699 79.3%
Kubernetes core/v1 248 retrieve-k5 + embedding + ontology 82.0% 98.0% 1,924 76.5%

How to read this table

  • baseline is the result of passing all tool definitions to the LLM without any retrieval.
  • retrieve-k variants pass only a subset of retrieved tools to the LLM, so both retrieval quality and LLM selection ability affect performance.
  • Therefore, a baseline accuracy of 100% does not mean retrieve-k accuracy must also be 100%.
  • Gold Tool Recall@K measures whether retrieval placed the canonical gold tool in the top-k,while End-to-end Accuracy measures whether the final task execution succeeded.
  • Because of this, evaluations that accept alternative tools or equivalent workflows may show the two values not exactly matching.

Key insights

  • Petstore / GitHub / Mixed MCP: When tool count is small or medium, baseline is already strong.In this range, graph-tool-call's main value is significantly reducing tokens without much accuracy loss.
  • Kubernetes core/v1 (248 tools): When tool count is large, baseline collapses due to context overload.graph-tool-call recovers performance from 12.0% to 78.0~82.0% by narrowing candidates through retrieval.
  • In practice, retrieve-k5 is the best default.It offers a good balance of token efficiency and performance. On large datasets, adding embedding / ontology yields further improvement.

Retrieval performance: Does the retriever find the correct tools in the top K?

The table below measures the quality of retrieval itself, before the LLM stage.Only BM25 + graph traversal were used here — no embedding or ontology.

How to read the metrics

  • Gold Tool Recall@K: Was the canonical gold tool designated as the correct answer included in the top K at the retrieval stage?
  • This table shows how well the retriever constructs the candidate set, not the final LLM selection accuracy.
  • Therefore, this table should be read together with the End-to-end Accuracy table above.
  • Even if retrieval places the gold tool in the top-k, the final LLM doesn't always select the correct answer.
  • Conversely, in end-to-end evaluations that accept alternative tools or equivalent workflows as correct, the final accuracy and gold recall may not exactly match.
Dataset Tools Gold Tool Recall@3 Gold Tool Recall@5 Gold Tool Recall@10
Petstore 19 93.3% 98.3% 98.3%
GitHub 50 87.5% 87.5% 92.5%
Mixed MCP 38 93.3% 96.7% 100.0%
Kubernetes core/v1 248 82.0% 91.0% 92.0%

How to read this table

  • Gold Tool Recall@K shows the retriever's ability to include the correct tool in the candidate set.
  • On small datasets, k=5 alone achieves high recall.
  • On large datasets, increasing k raises recall, but also increases the tokens passed to the LLM.
  • In practice, you should consider not just recall but also token cost and final end-to-end accuracy together.

Key insights

  • Petstore / Mixed MCP: k=5 alone includes nearly all correct tools in the candidate set.
  • GitHub: There is a recall gap between k=5 and k=10, so k=10 may be better if higher recall is needed.
  • Kubernetes core/v1: Even with a large number of tools, k=5 already achieves 91.0% gold recall.The retrieval stage alone can significantly compress the candidate set while retaining most correct tools.
  • Overall, retrieve-k5 is the most practical default.k=3 is lighter but may miss some correct tools, while k=10 may increase token costs relative to recall gains.

When do embedding and ontology help?

On the largest dataset, Kubernetes core/v1 (248 tools), we compared adding extra signals on top of retrieve-k5.

Pipeline End-to-end Accuracy Gold Tool Recall@5 Interpretation
retrieve-k5 78.0% 91.0% BM25 + graph alone is a strong baseline
+ embedding 80.0% 94.0% Recovers queries that are semantically similar but differently worded
+ ontology 82.0% 96.0% LLM-generated keywords/example queries significantly improve retrieval quality
+ embedding + ontology 82.0% 98.0% Accuracy maintained, gold recall at its highest

Summary

  • Embedding compensates for semantic similarity that BM25 misses.
  • Ontology expands the searchable representation itself when tool descriptions are short or non-standard.
  • Using both together may show limited additional gains in end-to-end accuracy, but the ability to include correct tools in the candidate set becomes strongest.

Reproduce it

# Retrieval quality (fast, no LLM needed)
python -m benchmarks.run_benchmark
python -m benchmarks.run_benchmark -d k8s -v

# Pipeline benchmark (LLM comparison)
python -m benchmarks.run_benchmark --mode pipeline -m qwen3:4b
python -m benchmarks.run_benchmark --mode pipeline --pipelines baseline retrieve-k3 retrieve-k5 retrieve-k10

# Save baseline and compare
python -m benchmarks.run_benchmark --mode pipeline --save-baseline
python -m benchmarks.run_benchmark --mode pipeline --diff

Basic Usage

From OpenAPI / Swagger

from graph_tool_call import ToolGraph

# From file (JSON / YAML)
tg = ToolGraph()
tg.ingest_openapi("path/to/openapi.json")

# From URL — auto-discovers all spec groups from Swagger UI
tg = ToolGraph.from_url("https://api.example.com/swagger-ui/index.html")

# With caching — build once, reload instantly
tg = ToolGraph.from_url(
    "https://api.example.com/swagger-ui/index.html",
    cache="my_api.json",
)

# Supports: Swagger 2.0, OpenAPI 3.0, OpenAPI 3.1

From MCP Server Tools

from graph_tool_call import ToolGraph

mcp_tools = [
    {
        "name": "read_file",
        "description": "Read a file",
        "inputSchema": {"type": "object", "properties": {"path": {"type": "string"}}},
        "annotations": {"readOnlyHint": True, "destructiveHint": False},
    },
    {
        "name": "delete_file",
        "description": "Delete a file permanently",
        "inputSchema": {"type": "object", "properties": {"path": {"type": "string"}}},
        "annotations": {"readOnlyHint": False, "destructiveHint": True},
    },
]

tg = ToolGraph()
tg.ingest_mcp_tools(mcp_tools, server_name="filesystem")

tools = tg.retrieve("delete temporary files", top_k=5)

MCP annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint) are used as retrieval signals.Query intent is automatically classified — read queries prioritize read-only tools, delete queries prioritize destructive tools.

Directly From an MCP Server

from graph_tool_call import ToolGraph

tg = ToolGraph()

# Public MCP endpoint
tg.ingest_mcp_server("https://mcp.example.com/mcp")

# Local/private MCP endpoint (explicit opt-in)
tg.ingest_mcp_server(
    "http://127.0.0.1:3000/mcp",
    allow_private_hosts=True,
)

ingest_mcp_server() calls HTTP JSON-RPC tools/list, fetches the tool list,then ingests it with MCP annotations preserved.

Remote ingest safety defaults:

  • private / localhost hosts are blocked by default
  • remote response size is capped
  • redirects are limited
  • unexpected content types are rejected

From Python Functions

from graph_tool_call import ToolGraph

def read_file(path: str) -> str:
    """Read contents of a file."""

def write_file(path: str, content: str) -> None:
    """Write contents to a file."""

tg = ToolGraph()
tg.ingest_functions([read_file, write_file])

Parameters are extracted from type hints, descriptions from docstrings.

Manual Tool Registration

from graph_tool_call import ToolGraph

tg = ToolGraph()

tg.add_tools([
    {
        "type": "function",
        "function": {
            "name": "get_weather",
            "description": "Get current weather for a city",
            "parameters": {
                "type": "object",
                "properties": {"city": {"type": "string"}},
            },
        },
    },
])

tg.add_relation("get_weather", "get_forecast", "complementary")

Embedding-based Hybrid Search

Add embedding-based semantic search on top of BM25 + graph.No heavy dependencies needed — use any external embedding server (Ollama, OpenAI, vLLM, etc.)or local sentence-transformers.

pip install graph-tool-call[embedding]           # numpy only (~20MB)
pip install graph-tool-call[embedding-local]      # + sentence-transformers (~2GB, local models)
# Ollama (recommended — lightweight, cross-language)
tg.enable_embedding("ollama/qwen3-embedding:0.6b")

# OpenAI
tg.enable_embedding("openai/text-embedding-3-large")

# vLLM / llama.cpp / any OpenAI-compatible server
tg.enable_embedding("vllm/Qwen/Qwen3-Embedding-0.6B")
tg.enable_embedding("vllm/model@http://gpu-box:8000/v1")
tg.enable_embedding("llamacpp/model@http://192.168.1.10:8080/v1")
tg.enable_embedding("http://localhost:8000/v1@my-model")

# Sentence-transformers (requires embedding-local extra)
tg.enable_embedding("sentence-transformers/all-MiniLM-L6-v2")

# Custom callable
tg.enable_embedding(lambda texts: my_embed_fn(texts))

Weights are automatically rebalanced when embedding is enabled. You can fine-tune them:

tg.set_weights(keyword=0.1, graph=0.4, embedding=0.5)

Save and Load

Build once, reuse everywhere. The full graph structure (nodes, edges, relation types, weights) is preserved.

# Save
tg.save("my_graph.json")

# Load
tg = ToolGraph.load("my_graph.json")

# Or use cache= in from_url() for automatic save/load
tg = ToolGraph.from_url(url, cache="my_graph.json")

When embedding search is enabled, saved graphs also preserve:

  • embedding vectors
  • restorable embedding provider config when available
  • retrieval weights
  • diversity settings

This lets ToolGraph.load() restore hybrid retrieval state without rebuilding embeddings from scratch.

Analysis and Dashboard

report = tg.analyze()
print(report.orphan_tools)

app = tg.dashboard_app()
# or: tg.dashboard(port=8050)

analyze() builds an operational summary with duplicates, conflicts, orphan tools,category coverage, and relation counts. dashboard() launches the interactiveDash Cytoscape UI for graph inspection and retrieval testing.

Advanced Features

Cross-Encoder Reranking

Second-stage reranking using a cross-encoder model.

tg.enable_reranker()  # default: cross-encoder/ms-marco-MiniLM-L-6-v2
tools = tg.retrieve("cancel order", top_k=5)

After narrowing candidates with wRRF, (query, tool_description) pairs are jointly encoded for more precise ranking.

MMR Diversity

Reduces redundant results to secure more diverse candidates.

tg.enable_diversity(lambda_=0.7)

History-Aware Retrieval

Pass previously called tool names to improve next-step retrieval.

# First call
tools = tg.retrieve("find my order")
# → [listOrders, getOrder, ...]

# Second call
tools = tg.retrieve("now cancel it", history=["listOrders", "getOrder"])
# → [cancelOrder, processRefund, ...]

Already-used tools are demoted, and tools closer to the next step in the graph are boosted.

wRRF Weight Tuning

Adjust the contribution of each signal.

tg.set_weights(
    keyword=0.2,     # BM25 text matching
    graph=0.5,       # graph traversal
    embedding=0.3,   # semantic similarity
    annotation=0.2,  # MCP annotation matching
)

LLM-Enhanced Ontology

Build richer tool ontologies using any LLM.Useful for category generation, relation inference, and search keyword expansion.

tg.auto_organize(llm="ollama/qwen2.5:7b")
tg.auto_organize(llm=lambda p: my_llm(p))
tg.auto_organize(llm=openai.OpenAI())
tg.auto_organize(llm="litellm/claude-sonnet-4-20250514")
Supported LLM inputs
Input Wrapped as
OntologyLLM instance Pass-through
callable(str) -> str CallableOntologyLLM
OpenAI client (has chat.completions) OpenAIClientOntologyLLM
"ollama/model" OllamaOntologyLLM
"openai/model" OpenAICompatibleOntologyLLM
"litellm/model" litellm.completion wrapper

Duplicate Detection

Find and merge duplicate tools across multiple API specs.

duplicates = tg.find_duplicates(threshold=0.85)
merged = tg.merge_duplicates(duplicates)
# merged = {"getUser_1": "getUser", ...}

Export and Visualization

# Interactive HTML (vis.js)
tg.export_html("graph.html", progressive=True)

# GraphML (Gephi, yEd)
tg.export_graphml("graph.graphml")

# Neo4j Cypher
tg.export_cypher("graph.cypher")

API Spec Lint Integration

Auto-fix poor OpenAPI specs before ingestion using ai-api-lint.

pip install graph-tool-call[lint]
tg = ToolGraph.from_url(url, lint=True)

CLI Reference

# One-liner search (ingest + retrieve in one step)
graph-tool-call search "cancel order" --source https://api.example.com/openapi.json
graph-tool-call search "delete user" --source ./openapi.json --scores --json

# MCP server
graph-tool-call serve --source https://api.example.com/openapi.json
graph-tool-call serve --graph prebuilt.json
graph-tool-call serve -s https://api1.com/spec.json -s https://api2.com/spec.json

# Build and save graph
graph-tool-call ingest https://api.example.com/openapi.json -o graph.json
graph-tool-call ingest ./spec.yaml --embedding --organize

# Search from pre-built graph
graph-tool-call retrieve "query" -g graph.json -k 10

# Analyze, visualize, dashboard
graph-tool-call analyze graph.json --duplicates --conflicts
graph-tool-call visualize graph.json -f html
graph-tool-call info graph.json
graph-tool-call dashboard graph.json --port 8050

Full API Reference

ToolGraph methods
Method Description
add_tool(tool) Add a single tool (auto-detects format)
add_tools(tools) Add multiple tools
ingest_openapi(source) Ingest from OpenAPI / Swagger spec
ingest_mcp_tools(tools) Ingest from MCP tool list
ingest_mcp_server(url) Fetch and ingest from MCP HTTP server
ingest_functions(fns) Ingest from Python callables
ingest_arazzo(source) Ingest Arazzo 1.0.0 workflow spec
from_url(url, cache=...) Build from Swagger UI or spec URL
add_relation(src, tgt, type) Add a manual relation
auto_organize(llm=...) Auto-categorize tools
build_ontology(llm=...) Build complete ontology
retrieve(query, top_k=10) Search for tools
validate_tool_call(call) Validate and auto-correct a tool call
assess_tool_call(call) Return allow / confirm / deny decision
enable_embedding(provider) Enable hybrid embedding search
enable_reranker(model) Enable cross-encoder reranking
enable_diversity(lambda_) Enable MMR diversity
set_weights(...) Tune wRRF fusion weights
find_duplicates(threshold) Find duplicate tools
merge_duplicates(pairs) Merge detected duplicates
apply_conflicts() Detect and add CONFLICTS_WITH edges
analyze() Build operational analysis summary
save(path) / load(path) Serialize / deserialize
export_html(path) Export interactive HTML visualization
export_graphml(path) Export to GraphML format
export_cypher(path) Export as Neo4j Cypher statements
dashboard_app() / dashboard() Build or launch interactive dashboard
suggest_next(tool, history=...) Suggest next tools based on graph

Feature Comparison

Feature Vector-only solutions graph-tool-call
Dependencies Embedding model required Zero (core runs on stdlib)
Tool source Manual registration Auto-ingest from Swagger / OpenAPI / MCP
Search method Flat vector similarity Multi-stage hybrid (wRRF + rerank + MMR)
Behavioral semantics None MCP annotation-aware retrieval
Tool relations None 6 relation types, auto-detected
Call ordering None State machine + CRUD + response→request data flow
Deduplication None Cross-source duplicate detection
Ontology None Auto / LLM-Auto modes
History awareness None Demotes used tools, boosts next-step
Spec quality Assumes good specs ai-api-lint auto-fix integration
LLM dependency Required Optional (better with, works without)

Documentation

Doc Description
Architecture System overview, pipeline layers, data model
WBS Work Breakdown Structure — Phase 0~4 progress
Design Algorithm design — spec normalization, dependency detection, search modes, call ordering, ontology modes
Research Competitive analysis, API scale data, commerce patterns
Release Checklist Release process, changelog flow, pre-release checks
OpenAPI Guide How to write API specs that produce better tool graphs

Contributing

Contributions are welcome.

# Development setup
git clone https://github.com/SonAIengine/graph-tool-call.git
cd graph-tool-call
pip install poetry
poetry install --with dev --all-extras   # install all optional deps for full test coverage

# Run tests
poetry run pytest -v

# Lint
poetry run ruff check .
poetry run ruff format --check .

# Run benchmarks
python -m benchmarks.run_benchmark -v

License

MIT

MCP Server · Populars

MCP Server · New

    smart-mcp-proxy

    MCPProxy – Smart Proxy for AI Agents

    Supercharge AI Agents, Safely

    Community smart-mcp-proxy
    wowyuarm

    File Ops

    A local file operations skill for AI agents: convert, inspect, archive, and extract text

    Community wowyuarm
    cyanheads

    @cyanheads/mcp-ts-core

    TypeScript template for building Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers. Ships with declarative tools/resources, pluggable auth, multi-backend storage, OpenTelemetry observability, and first-class support for both local and edge (Cloudflare Workers) runtimes.

    Community cyanheads
    bitbonsai

    MCP-Vault

    A lightweight Model Context Protocol (MCP) server for safe Obsidian vault access

    Community bitbonsai
    KeyID-AI

    @keyid/agent-kit

    Give Claude/Cursor email powers. 27 MCP tools — inbox, send, reply, contacts, search. Free, no signup.

    Community KeyID-AI