What RAG throws away.
Embedding your code flattens it into disconnected chunks. Graphify keeps the entities and the typed relationships between them, and hands your coding assistant a graph it can traverse.
A code knowledge graph is a structured representation of a codebase in which functions, classes, files, tables, and docs are nodes, and their real relationships (calls, imports, defines, references) are typed, directed edges. Where RAG retrieves chunks of text that resemble a question, a knowledge graph lets an assistant traverse those edges, answering multi-hop questions by following an explicit, inspectable path.
Why relationships beat similarity
Retrieval-augmented generation, introduced by Lewis et al. (2020) for knowledge-intensive NLP over Wikipedia, splits your documents into chunks, embeds them, and pulls the top-k most similar chunks at query time. It works for lookup, but it throws away the one thing agents need to reason: how things connect. Graphify keeps that structure as entities and typed relationships, so an agent can follow a real path from question to answer.
The multi-hop failure isn't a tuning problem; it's architectural. A top-k lookup is a single round of nearest-neighbor search, but a two-hop question needs the answer to hop one before hop two can even be formulated. Multi-hop reasoning is hard enough for retrieval systems that dedicated benchmarks like HotpotQA (Yang et al., 2018) were built to measure it. A graph sidesteps the problem: each hop is one edge, so a three-hop question is a three-edge traversal, and the third hop is exactly as reliable as the first. Notably, the RAG literature itself has been moving this direction: GraphRAG (Edge et al., 2024) builds a knowledge graph over the corpus precisely because flat chunk retrieval can't answer questions that span it. Graphify simply starts from the graph.
Freshness without re-embedding
When a source changes, RAG re-embeds: every stale chunk goes back through an embedding model before it can be retrieved again. Graphify's code edges come from a parser, not a model (tree-sitter walks the AST deterministically, with no API call), so a changed file means re-parsing that file and updating its nodes. The surrounding edges stay intact, and your memory stays current without a re-index tax.
Answers you can trace
Because every result is a traversal, every answer traces to a path through your real code. Every relationship on that path carries a confidence tag: EXTRACTED, INFERRED, or AMBIGUOUS. That's the difference between "the model probably saw the right chunk" and "here is the exact route it took, and how sure we are about each hop."
Common questions
Is graphify a replacement for my vector database?
Can I use both?
Does graphify use embeddings at all?
How hard is it to migrate off RAG?
Try it on your own repo.
103,938 stars on GitHub. Read the code.Evaluating for a team? See Graphify Enterprise →