Skip to main content
Glama
CarlxsMG

UEAgent

by CarlxsMG
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

bind_component_property_to_sequence

Destructive

Bind an actor component to a Level Sequence and add a typed property track, enabling animation of that component property in Unreal Engine.

Instructions

Bind an editor-world actor's component to a Level Sequence (possessable, parented to actor's binding) and add a typed property track to its binding.

Returns: { sequence_path: string, actor_name: string, component_name: string, property_name: string, property_type: string, binding_guid: string, parented_to_actor: bool, track_class: string, section_class: string, saved: bool, save_error?: string }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actor_nameYesLabel (or name) of the actor in the current editor world.
track_labelNoOptional display label for the new track.
property_nameYesName of the property to animate.
property_typeYesOne of "Float", "Bool", "Vector", "Color", "Visibility".
sequence_nameNoAlias for sequence_path.
sequence_pathNoAsset path of the Level Sequence.
component_nameYesComponent object name, component class name, or "root".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

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

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false, so the mutation profile is covered. The Returns block adds real value by exposing saved/save_error, indicating the asset is persisted, but the description never states reversibility, required permissions, or what happens on a duplicate bind.

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?

One sentence of purpose followed by an explicit Returns block; front-loaded with the action and no filler. The returns list is somewhat long, but it substitutes for the missing output schema and is justified.

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 shape, and annotations cover the safety profile for a 7-parameter mutation tool. Gaps remain around failure modes and prerequisites, but for the structured data provided the description is largely complete.

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 all seven parameters, including the property_type value set and the sequence_name alias. The description adds only 'typed property track' and 'parented to actor's binding', which is marginally beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 (bind) plus the resource (component property to a Level Sequence) and clarifies the compound nature: possessable parented to the actor's binding plus a typed property track. It is distinguishable from generic siblings, though it never names the closely related bind_component_to_sequence or bind_actor_property_to_sequence to disambiguate.

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?

The description explains the effect but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (asset must exist, actor must be in the editor world), and no comparison against the very similar binding siblings. Usage is only implied.

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