Skip to main content
Glama
chanshawoh

yudao-pilot-mcp

by chanshawoh
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Init Workspace Config

init_workspace_config

Detect workspace backend and frontend projects, then create .yudao-pilot/config.yaml. When multiple candidates exist, request explicit selection instead of writing an ambiguous config.

Instructions

识别工作区项目并创建 .yudao-pilot/config.yaml；overwrite=true 会重建已有配置。

backend_path 与 frontend_projects 必须同时提供或同时省略，用于多项目目录下的显式选择； frontend_projects=[] 表示只配置后端。省略时按无歧义自动识别，存在多个后端或同类前端候选 时返回 selection_required 与候选清单，不写文件。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
overwriteNo
backend_pathNo
workspace_rootNo
frontend_projectsNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.4.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / backend_path
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / frontend_projects
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "path": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": {
+            "enum": [
+              "VUE3_ELEMENT_PLUS",
+              "VUE3_VBEN5_ANTD_SCHEMA",
+              "VUE3_VBEN5_ANTD_GENERAL",
+              "VUE3_VBEN5_EP_SCHEMA",
+              "VUE3_VBEN5_EP_GENERAL",
+              "VUE3_ADMIN_UNIAPP_WOT"
+            ],
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "type",
+          "path"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null
+}
  2. Addedv0.2.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare `readOnlyHint=false`, so the tool is known to mutate state. The description adds transparency by stating it creates a config file, that `overwrite=true` rebuilds existing config, and that in ambiguous cases it returns `selection_required` and writes no file. This goes beyond the annotation and covers important behavioral traits.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single dense paragraph that front-loads the main action and then explains parameter constraints and fallback behavior. Every sentence adds value, and it is not overly long. It could be broken into bullet points for clarity, but it is appropriately concise.

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 tool has an output schema (indicated by context), the description does not need to detail return values. It covers the core behavior, parameter relationships, and the edge case of ambiguity. It could mention prerequisites like existing workspace structure, but for a config-init tool it is fairly complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains `backend_path` and `frontend_projects` relationship and the meaning of an empty array, and partially explains `overwrite`. However, it does not describe `workspace_root` or the internal structure of `frontend_projects` items (type/path), leaving some parameters under-explained.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the tool identifies workspace projects and creates `.yudao-pilot/config.yaml`, with a specific verb (identify/create) and resource. It also explains the `overwrite` behavior. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like `load_workspace_config`, though the name 'init' vs 'load' makes it clear. 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 provides concrete usage rules: `backend_path` and `frontend_projects` must be provided together or omitted, and `frontend_projects=[]` means backend-only. It also explains the auto-detection fallback and the `selection_required` case when ambiguity exists. This gives clear guidance on how to invoke the tool, though it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools