Skip to main content
Glama

add_widget_animation

Add a UWidgetAnimation to a Widget Blueprint in Unreal Engine, building its inner MovieScene and compiling and saving the asset.

Instructions

Add a UWidgetAnimation (with an inner UMovieScene) to a Widget Blueprint. Mirrors the editor's "New Animation" flow: constructs a UWidgetAnimation on the blueprint, gives it an inner UMovieScene (20fps, 0..5s range), sets the display label, appends to WidgetBP->Animations, then compiles and saves.

Returns: { widget_bp_path: string, animation_name: string, object_name: string, display_name: string, added: bool, already_existed: bool, has_movie_scene: bool, animation_count: int, saved: bool, 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.
animation_nameYesname/display label for the new animation
blueprint_nameNoAlias of `widget_bp_path` (same value, same meaning). Accepted because sibling tools spell this parameter differently; prefer `widget_bp_path`.
widget_bp_pathNo/Game path of the Widget Blueprint asset

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Discloses the full side-effect chain (constructs the animation, creates an inner UMovieScene at 20fps over 0..5s, sets the display label, appends to the blueprint, then compiles and saves) and surfaces the already_existed guard plus a saved/save_error pair. This goes well beyond the safety annotations, which only say non-read-only, non-destructive.

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-loads the action in the first sentence, then the exact steps, then the return fields. No filler, though the return list is dense enough that a short reading-cost tradeoff exists.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the return object, and it covers defaults and side effects. It omits the PIE-blocking constraint at the top level (deferred to the `force` schema entry) and never states which parameters are required or what happens when the blueprint path is omitted, which for a create-and-save tool leaves a small gap.

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 structured data already documents all four parameters, including the PIE-refusal semantics of `force` and the alias relationship of `blueprint_name`/`widget_bp_path`. The description only lightly reinforces this by tying animation_name to the display label, so 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 and resource ('Add a UWidgetAnimation ... to a Widget Blueprint') and enumerates exactly what the operation does, which visibly distinguishes it from siblings like add_widget_animation_keyframe and add_widget_animation_track that mutate an existing animation rather than create one.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The 'Mirrors the editor's New Animation flow' phrasing implies the create-new use case, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no exclusions, and no routing to the sibling keyframe/track tools. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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