| name | memtrace-change-impact-analysis |
| description | Always use before source-code edits, refactors, API changes, renames, removals, PR reviews, or risk assessments when the user needs to know what will break. Do not manually grep references or browse files for impact; this workflow uses Memtrace graph context, impact, and change detection. |
Overview
Pre-change risk assessment workflow. Before modifying code, this workflow maps the full blast radius, identifies affected processes, checks recent change history for instability signals, and produces a risk-rated change plan.
Steps
1. Identify what's being changed
Find the target symbol(s):
- Use
find_symbol if the user named specific functions/classes
- Use
find_code if the user described behaviour ("the authentication middleware")
Collect symbol IDs for all targets.
2. Get 360° context for each target
For each symbol, call get_symbol_context:
- Direct callers and callees
- Community membership (which module is this in?)
- Process membership (which execution flows does this participate in?)
- Cross-repo API callers (is this an endpoint called by other services?)
Decision: If cross-repo API callers exist, this change requires coordination with other teams. Flag this immediately.
3. Compute blast radius
For each target, call get_impact with direction: both:
- Upstream impact: what depends on this symbol
- Downstream impact: what this symbol depends on
- Risk rating: Low / Medium / High / Critical
Decision:
| Risk | Action |
|---|
| Low | Proceed with standard testing |
| Medium | Review all direct callers; test affected processes |
| High | Plan incremental migration; consider feature flags |
| Critical | Full migration strategy; backward-compatible changes required |
4. Check temporal stability
Call get_evolution with mode novel for a 30-day window on the repo:
- Are any of the target symbols flagged as "rarely changing"? If so, this change is structurally surprising and deserves extra scrutiny.
- Have the target symbols been changing frequently? High churn + high impact = volatile hotspot.
5. Map affected execution flows
From step 2, you already know which processes are affected. For critical changes, use analyze_relationships with query_type: find_callers at depth: 3 to trace the full transitive caller chain.
6. Produce the risk assessment
Synthesize into a change plan:
- Target(s) — what's being changed and where
- Blast Radius — number of direct/transitive dependents, risk rating
- Affected Processes — which execution flows will be impacted
- Cross-Service Impact — any external callers or consumers
- Stability Signal — is this code stable (novel) or volatile (frequent changes)?
- Recommended Approach — based on risk: direct change, incremental migration, or backward-compatible evolution
- Test Coverage — which callers/processes to verify after the change
Decision Points
| Condition | Action |
|---|
| Risk = Critical | Recommend backward-compatible change + deprecation path |
| Cross-repo callers exist | Flag as requiring multi-service coordination |
| Symbol has high novelty score | Extra review — this rarely changes; make sure the change is intentional |
| Multiple processes affected | List each affected flow; recommend testing each one |
| Symbol is a bridge point | Change may disconnect parts of the architecture — verify alternative paths exist |
