Skip to main content
Glama

add_component_bound_event

Idempotent

Bind a Blueprint component's multicast delegate to a handler event in the event graph, then compile and verify it. Also wires widget events like Button OnClicked.

Instructions

Bind a multicast delegate OF ONE OF THIS BLUEPRINT'S OWN COMPONENTS (OnComponentBeginOverlap, OnComponentHit, a vendor component's dispatcher...) to a generated handler event in the event graph -- the editor's component-event flow -- then compile and re-check that the binding registered (bound). ALSO WORKS ON A WIDGET BLUEPRINT: pass the WBP and a WIDGET's name as component_name to wire a Button's OnClicked, a Slider's OnValueChanged, a CheckBox's OnCheckStateChanged -- exactly what the Designer's "+ OnClicked" green button does, and the only headless route to it (bound:true, with a BndEvt__..._OnButtonClickedEvent created). A UMG widget is not an SCS component but IS a property of the generated class, which is all this needs. Idempotent: an identical binding is returned instead of duplicated. The Blueprint must already be compiled, since the component/widget has to exist as a property of the generated class. For a dispatcher on an object that is NOT self and NOT one of its components, use add_object_bound_event; for one on SELF, add_graph_node node_type="add_delegate".

Returns: { node_id, class, title, pins:[...the delegate's params as OUTPUT pins...], blueprint_name, graph_name, component_name, delegate, custom_function_name, bound, already_exists? } -- bound is a post-compile re-lookup (the real oracle); already_exists is only present when an existing binding was reused.

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)
delegate_nameYesExact multicast delegate property name on the COMPONENT's class (e.g. "OnComponentBeginOverlap"). On a miss the error names the component class so the right delegate can be looked up.
node_positionNoNode canvas position as [x, y]; takes precedence over position_x/position_y
blueprint_nameNoName (or full object path) of an Actor Blueprint OR a Widget Blueprint (already compiled).
blueprint_pathNoAlias of `blueprint_name` (same value, same meaning). Accepted because sibling tools spell this parameter differently; prefer `blueprint_name`.
component_nameYesSCS component variable name on this Blueprint (e.g. "BodyMesh"), OR -- on a Widget Blueprint -- the name of a widget in its tree (e.g. "Btn_Play"); resolved on the skeleton class, so inherited components and widgets work too.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds substantial context beyond them: the post-compile re-lookup oracle (bound), the optional already_exists flag, the compile-required precondition, the editor component-event flow it emulates, and the PIE refusal semantics (world GC leak can kill the editor, AllowSavingAssetsDuringPIE=0 silent no-write).

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and alternative routing in the first sentences, and the return shape is stated cleanly. It is however extremely dense with ALL-CAPS emphasis and parenthetical asides, making it read as a wall of text rather than a structured spec, which slightly hurts scanability.

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 9-parameter, mutation-style graph tool with no output schema, the description carries the full load: it documents the return object field-by-field, the compile precondition, idempotency behavior, PIE restrictions, and the widget-vs-SCS duality. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema already describes each parameter richly, so the baseline is 3. The description nevertheless adds cross-cutting meaning the schema does not: that component_name accepts either an SCS component on an Actor BP or a widget name on a WBP, and that delegate_name must be the multicast delegate property on the *component's* class. That is genuine value above the per-field text.

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+resource: binding a multicast delegate of the blueprint's own component (or widget) to a generated handler event in the event graph, then compiling and re-checking. It explicitly names the sibling tools it is not (add_object_bound_event for non-self objects, add_graph_node for self), so an agent can disambiguate without reading any other 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?

Explicit routing rules: use add_object_bound_event for a dispatcher on an object that is not self and not one of its components, and add_graph_node node_type="add_delegate" for one on SELF. It also states the precondition (Blueprint must already be compiled) and the PIE restriction. Nothing is left to inference.

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