DBJavaGenix

codegen_render_dao

Generates DAO or Repository layer code (JpaRepository or BaseMapper) using a pre-built context from codegen_build_context. Requires prior context generation.

Instructions

渲染 DAO/Repository 层(JpaRepository 或 BaseMapper)。需要先调用 codegen_build_context 获取 context。

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "context": "<context>"
    },
    "name": "codegen_render_dao"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`context`	Yes	从 codegen_build_context 返回的完整模板上下文 dict。包含 className/columns/primaryKeyType/templateCategory 等字段。LLM 应原样传递,可在传入前修改字段以重新渲染。

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1May 26, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the rendering action and prerequisite but lacks details on side effects, idempotency, permissions, or error conditions. The information is adequate but minimal.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two succinct sentences with no redundant information. The key information is front-loaded, making it easy to parse. Every word serves a purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the simple single-parameter input and absence of output schema, the description is complete enough for its complexity. It covers the prerequisite and action. However, a note on what the output (rendered code) looks like could enhance completeness, but is not critical.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with a detailed description for the single parameter 'context'. The tool description adds the prerequisite step but does not significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'render' and the resource 'DAO/Repository layer (JpaRepository or BaseMapper)', distinguishing it from sibling render tools for controller, entity, etc. It is specific and unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly states a prerequisite ('call codegen_build_context first'), guiding the agent on when to use this tool. However, it does not provide explicit when-not-to-use or alternative selection guidance among sibling render tools, which is a minor gap.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.