Skip to main content
Glama

add_anim_conduit

Idempotent

Creates a named conduit node in an Animation Blueprint state machine, saving it unconnected for later transition links.

Instructions

Add a conduit node named conduit_name to an existing state machine of an Animation Blueprint (a missing blueprint or machine is an error; create the machine with add_anim_state_machine), then mark the blueprint structurally modified and save it without compiling. Idempotent by name: an existing conduit is returned unchanged (already_existed true). The conduit is placed unconnected: link it to states with add_anim_transition; remove_anim_conduit undoes it. Refused while PIE runs unless force=true; a failed save is an error, the change kept in memory.

Returns: { anim_blueprint_path: string, machine_name: string, conduit_name: string, node_class: string, conduit_created: bool, already_existed: bool, saved: bool, conduit_count: int, save_error?: string }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
forceNoOptional. This command is REFUSED while a Play-in-Editor session is running: it either compiles a Blueprint (the reinstancer can retain a world, and CheckForWorldGCLeaks is Fatal -- it KILLS the editor) or writes to disk (Editor.AllowSavingAssetsDuringPIE=0 makes the engine refuse the write, so it would report success without writing a byte). Stop PIE and retry instead; force=true runs it anyway, at your own risk.
conduit_nameYesName for the new conduit
machine_nameYesName of the target state machine
blueprint_nameNoAlias of `anim_blueprint_path` (same value, same meaning). Accepted because sibling tools spell this parameter differently; prefer `anim_blueprint_path`.
anim_blueprint_pathNoPath to the UAnimBlueprint asset

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover read/write, idempotency and openness, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: the blueprint is structurally modified and saved without compiling, failed saves keep the change in memory, and the PIE refusal rationale is explained. This is rich, specific behavioral disclosure.

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 core action is front-loaded in the first clause, followed by side effects, idempotency, connection workflow and PIE rules, then an explicit Returns line. Dense but nearly every clause carries information; only minor tightening is possible.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Although there is no output schema, the description enumerates the return fields explicitly. Combined with prerequisites, error semantics, idempotency and unconnected-placement notes, an agent has everything needed to invoke and interpret the call.

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 100%, including a detailed force description, so the schema already documents all five parameters and the alias behavior. The description adds no syntax or meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (add) and resource (conduit node) with the exact target (an existing state machine of an Animation Blueprint), and names the constraining condition that a missing blueprint or machine is an error. An agent can distinguish it from sibling add_anim_state_machine and add_anim_transition immediately.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly routes to alternatives: create the machine with add_anim_state_machine, link the conduit to states with add_anim_transition, and undo via remove_anim_conduit. It also states the PIE prerequisite (refused while PIE runs unless force=true), covering when and when-not.

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