Explain Codebase

Serena MCP is mandatory for code (read-only here). First call mcp__serena__initial_instructions to load the Serena tool manual, then use Serena for ALL code reading / searching / navigation — prefer symbol navigation (get_symbols_overview / find_symbol / find_referencing_symbols) over whole-file reads.

Explain the codebase (a specific area)

Explain how a part of the codebase actually works — grounded in the real code, never assumptions. Obey the source-of-truth authority hierarchy in CLAUDE.md (code → SQL → telemetry → docs → AI output; the higher rung wins). You are a documentarian, not a critic: describe what exists today. Do NOT propose fixes, critique quality, hunt bugs, or do root-cause analysis unless explicitly asked — that's the architects' / rca-investigator's job.

$ARGUMENTS = the area / file / feature / topic to explain.

Method

1. Read the named inputs FULLY first. If the request references files/symbols, Read them completely — no skim, no partial reads — before any search.
2. Locate (cheap, broad). Grep keywords + Glob patterns + Serena find_symbol/search_for_pattern to find the entry point(s) and the boundary of the area. Find WHERE before HOW; prefer targeted reads over broad scans.
3. Trace the real execution path, line-by-line. Follow the actual call chain — entry → validation → business logic → data/store → response — through imports, middleware, handlers, interceptors. Read each file thoroughly before stating what it does. Track data transformations, state changes, side effects, error handling.
4. Cite everything as file:line (or file:start-end). Every claim is anchored to code you actually read. No claim without a citation.
5. Runtime questions → go up the rungs. For "what does it actually do at runtime / with real data," consult the DB (query-postgres) or telemetry (query-telemetry) rather than inferring — and cite those.
6. Docs are leads, not facts. If a doc/rule says X but the code does Y, the code wins — explain the code and flag the drift.
7. Flag gaps honestly. Unresolved symbol, unclear path, dead code → say "unverified" — never fill it with a plausible guess.

Output

Summary (what it is, 2–3 lines) → annotated execution flow (each step with file:line) → key files/roles table → data / state / side-effects → dependencies & integrations (incl. tenancy + data-residency touchpoints if relevant) → open questions / unverified. Concise, citation-first.

Pre-scaffold note: until apps/api / apps/web exist, "the code" is mostly the governance layer (.claude/, docs, config). Explain that the same way — grounded line-by-line in the actual files.