Skip to main content
Glama

add_branch_node

Add a Branch (if/then/else) node to a Blueprint graph and compile the Blueprint as a side effect; use for standalone branch insertion when a compile is needed.

Instructions

Add a Branch (if/then/else) node -- pins 'execute', 'Condition', 'then' (true), 'else' (false) -- AND compile the Blueprint as a side effect. add_graph_node node_type="branch" creates the identical node without compiling, which is what you want inside a build_blueprint_graph batch; use this one when a standalone compile is wanted anyway. Leaving 'else' unwired is legitimate and lint_blueprint_graph will not flag it, except inside a function that returns a value (function_exit_without_return).

Returns: { node_id, class, title, pins:[execute, Condition, then, else], blueprint_name, graph_name }

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.
graph_nameNoTarget graph name; defaults to the Blueprint's event graph when omitted
position_xNoNode X position on the graph canvas (ignored when node_position is set)
position_yNoNode Y position on the graph canvas (ignored when node_position is set)
node_positionNoNode canvas position as [x, y]; takes precedence over position_x/position_y
blueprint_nameNoName (or full object path) of the Blueprint.
blueprint_pathNoAlias of `blueprint_name` (same value, same meaning). Accepted because sibling tools spell this parameter differently; prefer `blueprint_name`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, which already indicate a non-readonly, non-destructive, non-idempotent mutation, the description discloses the crucial hidden side effect (compiles the Blueprint), describes the exact pins produced, and explains lint behavior for unwired 'else' pins. This is exactly the kind of beyond-annotations context the dimension rewards.

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?

The core action and its compile side effect are front-loaded, followed by the sibling distinction and the lint edge case. The Returns line is valuable because there is no output schema, and every sentence earns its place without waste.

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?

For a node-creation tool with no output schema, the description supplies purpose, sibling routing, side-effect behavior, lint semantics, and a structured return summary. Together with the rich input schema and annotations, an agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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%, so all seven parameters, including PIE refusal behavior for force and the blueprint_path alias, are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional input-parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'Add a Branch (if/then/else) node' plus the exact side effect of compiling the Blueprint. It also names the pins created and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling add_graph_node, so an agent can tell them apart without opening either schema.

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?

It gives explicit usage guidance: add_graph_node is for build_blueprint_graph batches, while this tool is for standalone compiles. It also clarifies the legitimacy of leaving 'else' unwired and notes the one lint exception, covering both when to use it and an important edge case.

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