Create a minimal genshin-ts project in any target directory, generating package.json, gsts.config.ts, and src/main.ts for classic or beyond modes.
在 targetDir 创建最小可用 genshin-ts 工程（package.json / gsts.config.ts / src/main.ts）。mode: classic|beyond
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| mode | No | 默认 beyond | |
| name | No | 项目显示名，默认取目录名 | |
| targetDir | Yes | 目标目录绝对或相对路径 |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that files are created and that mode has two values, but it does not state whether existing files are overwritten, whether targetDir must be empty, what classic vs beyond actually change, or what the tool returns. This is a significant gap for a file-creating tool.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is one compact sentence plus a short mode enumeration, front-loading the action and resource. Every sentence earns its place with no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a 3-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is incomplete: mode semantics, overwrite behavior, and targetDir requirements are unspecified, and there is no return-value guidance. The file list and schema partially compensate, but an agent could still call it with unsafe assumptions.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description merely echoes targetDir and mode without adding new semantic detail, and it omits name entirely, though the schema covers it.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description opens with a specific verb (创建) and a clear resource (最小可用 genshin-ts 工程), then enumerates the generated files. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like compile_project or project_status, which operate on an existing project rather than creating a new one.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description clearly implies use when bootstrapping a new genshin-ts project in targetDir. It does not explicitly list exclusions or alternatives, but no sibling tool performs scaffolding, so the intended usage context is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.