Skip to main content
Glama
CarlxsMG

UEAgent

by CarlxsMG
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

add_camera_cut_section

Add a camera cut section to a Level Sequence for a given camera binding GUID over a specified frame range.

Instructions

Append a new UMovieSceneCameraCutSection bound to the given camera binding GUID over a frame range.

Returns: { sequence_path: string, track_class: string, camera_binding_guid: string, section_index: int, section_count: int, start_frame: int, end_frame: int, section_added: bool, saved: bool, save_error?: string }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
end_frameNoExclusive end frame (default = start_frame + 1).
start_frameNoInclusive start frame (default 0).
sequence_nameNoAlias for sequence_path.
sequence_pathNoAsset path of the Level Sequence.
camera_binding_guidYesGUID of the camera binding the cut switches to.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.2.2
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "sequence_path",
-  "sequence_name",
-  "camera_binding_guid"
-]New value: +[
+  "camera_binding_guid"
+]
  2. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent write, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value by disclosing the return contract inline (section_added, saved, save_error), which matters because there is no output schema. It still does not say whether a missing track is created or whether the sequence must be saved separately.

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 behavioral sentence is front-loaded and waste-free, and the return-field dump is justified because no output schema exists. The raw type listing is slightly untidy but every element earns its place.

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?

For a mid-complexity write operation with no output schema, the description covers the mutation and its result shape adequately. It omits only the operational preconditions (which track receives the section, whether saving is required) that an agent would still have to discover.

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 the schema already documents defaults (start_frame 0, end_frame = start_frame + 1), the sequence_path alias, and the GUID meaning. The description only restates the binding-GUID and frame-range concept, adding no syntax or edge-case detail beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Append a new UMovieSceneCameraCutSection,' naming the exact class and its scoping (bound to a camera binding GUID over a frame range). It is clear what the tool produces, though it never distinguishes itself from close siblings like add_camera_cut or add_camera_cut_track.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this versus add_camera_cut/add_camera_cut_track, and no stated prerequisites (e.g. whether a camera cut track must already exist before appending a section to it). The agent must infer placement from the class name alone.

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