Before changing a store, find its consumers

Question: If we change Zustand's store core, where should a developer or coding agent look next?

In a real, frozen Zustand checkout, SAGE located the createStore definition and returned three dependent modules from its indexed dependency graph. We checked those connections against the source. The result is a concrete review starting point: inspect the public entry point and both React bindings before changing the store implementation.

Repository -> output -> decision

The target was Zustand at commit b57db4f, not today's upstream state. The analyzer was the published Nexora SAGE v1.4.0 source, used in a separate local installation. The question concerned src/vanilla.ts.

The query used SQLite-backed dependencies with depth 2. These are three returned graph dependents, not a promise that every affected consumer, type contract, dynamic reference or downstream application has been found. Middleware also imports types from the core; changing StoreApi requires additional type-contract review, not just this three-file list.

This is orientation for a proposed change. We did not edit Zustand or claim that its store is defective. SAGE supplied grounded information; the developer still owns scope, compatibility checks and the decision to change code.

What ran

An explicit MAIN analysis selected the src project and indexed 15 TypeScript source files. The complete target integrity inventory contained 144 files. Those denominators describe different scopes: this was not a whole-repository assessment. The demo, starter and repository-root test suites were outside the selected Atlas scope.

SAGE's analysis process completed, but its quality gate was FAIL. The four enforced failures concerned React capability detection/partial capability and proof-obligation completeness. They were not adjudicated as Zustand defects in this case study. A successful command does not turn that gate green.

The target's files and clean Git status were unchanged after analysis and queries. No target dependencies were installed, no target configuration was executed, and no native tests, React component or browser were run. SAGE's AST parser used TypeScript 5.9.3; this was not the target's native TypeScript 6.x compiler check. The local Node runtime was outside the release CI reference major, which setup disclosed rather than treating as equivalent CI coverage.

A test boundary worth knowing

get_test_impact returned an empty candidate list for this file. That is not evidence that Zustand has no relevant tests. Source inspection found tests/vanilla/basic.test.ts and tests/vanilla/subscribe.test.tsx, importing zustand/vanilla. The repository's TypeScript/Vitest configuration maps that package alias to src/vanilla.ts; the Vitest configuration names tests as its test directory.

Those tests were found during manual verification, not returned by SAGE. The selected Atlas excludes that directory, and the live fallback inspects co-located siblings rather than this separate alias-bound suite. We retained this acquisition limitation for follow-up instead of presenting an empty list as complete test coverage. Review native suites before relying on a change.

Try the same question

The short demo shows the actual bounded output and the commands/tools used. The public-safe evidence projection records the exact target, analyzer, generation, selected file hashes and limits. It is an editorial projection, not a new product artifact or release gate.

One verified example does not measure accuracy, time saved, token savings or runtime correctness. It demonstrates a practical use: turn a proposed core change into a source-grounded list of places to inspect next. Zustand does not endorse SAGE through this evaluation.