---
id: AGD-0043
ticket: pbs-lsp-find-references
title: PBS LSP Find References
status: open
created: 2026-07-15
resolved:
decision:
tags: [studio, lsp, vscode, compiler-pbs, editor, references]
---

## Pain

Domain owner: `studio/lsp`

PBS users cannot ask where a symbol is used, so changes to functions, services, structs, constants, and stdlib-facing APIs require manual search that confuses overloads and unrelated text matches.

## Context

Completion and hover already resolve symbols in local editor context, but the LSP does not expose references and the compiler/editorial layer does not yet provide project-wide usage locations keyed by semantic identity.

## Open Questions

- [ ] Which declarations need reference tracking first: local functions, methods, types, constants, imports, stdlib symbols, or all of them?
- [ ] How should overloads and same-name symbols in different scopes be disambiguated?
- [ ] Should references include declarations, write/read classification, or only usage sites in the first wave?

## Options

### Option A - Text search with filters

- **Approach:** Search workspace text for the selected identifier and filter obvious false positives by token kind.
- **Pro:** Simple and fast for early demos.
- **Con:** Incorrect for overloads, scope, shadowing, fields, methods, imports, and generated/stdlib surfaces.
- **Maintainability:** Poor; later semantic references would duplicate and replace it.

### Option B - Semantic usage index

- **Approach:** During semantic analysis, emit definition and usage sites tied to stable symbol identities and expose `textDocument/references`.
- **Pro:** Correct foundation for rename, call hierarchy, diagnostics UX, and code actions.
- **Con:** Requires compiler-facing usage modeling and careful invalidation.
- **Maintainability:** Strong; one source of truth for all symbol usage features.

## Tradeoffs

Reference accuracy matters more than early breadth. False positives are worse than missing unsupported categories because users will trust rename and references for safe edits.

## Recommendation

Prefer Option B, but scope the first wave to project-owned declarations whose identity is already resolved reliably.

## Discussion

References should follow go-to-definition because both need the same identity and location model.

## Resolution

Ainda em aberto.

## Next Step

Define first-wave symbol categories and whether declarations are included in reference results.