Skip to main content
Glama
CarlxsMG

UEAgent

by CarlxsMG
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

clear_anim_graph_node_pin_binding

DestructiveIdempotent

Remove a property binding from an AnimGraph node input pin to drop stale bindings without recreating the node or recompiling the AnimBP; undoable and saves the asset.

Instructions

Remove the property binding from one input pin of an AnimGraph node (inverse of set_anim_graph_node_pin_binding), dropping a stale binding without recreating the node. Returns was_bound, is_bound and cleared; an unbound pin gives cleared=false, not an error. Undoable; saves the AnimBP without recompiling (run compile_anim_blueprint).

Returns: { node_id, pin_name, was_bound, is_bound, cleared, saved }

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.
node_idYesNodeGuid of the target UAnimGraphNode_* (from get_graph_nodes).
pin_nameYesThe bound property/pin name whose binding to clear (e.g. "TransformTrajectory").
graph_nameNoTarget graph (optional; deep-resolved; default the top-level AnimGraph).
anim_blueprintNoAlias of anim_blueprint_path, used only when anim_blueprint_path is absent or empty.
blueprint_nameNoAlias of anim_blueprint_path, used only when anim_blueprint_path and anim_blueprint are both absent or empty.
blueprint_pathNoAlias of `blueprint_name` (same value, same meaning). Accepted because sibling tools spell this parameter differently; prefer `blueprint_name`.
anim_blueprint_pathNoPath or name of the UAnimBlueprint (aliases: anim_blueprint, blueprint_name).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.2.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / anim_blueprint / description
      Added value: +"Alias of anim_blueprint_path, used only when anim_blueprint_path is absent or empty."
    • addedInput schema / properties / blueprint_name / description
      Added value: +"Alias of anim_blueprint_path, used only when anim_blueprint_path and anim_blueprint are both absent or empty."
  2. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=true, and the description adds real value beyond that: an unbound pin yields cleared=false rather than an error, the change is undoable, and it saves the AnimBP without recompiling. The significant PIE-refusal behavior, however, lives only in the schema's force parameter, not the description.

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 purpose and routing come first and every clause is substantive, but the 'Returns was_bound, is_bound and cleared' sentence is immediately duplicated by the 'Returns: { node_id, pin_name, was_bound, is_bound, cleared, saved }' line, a small redundancy that keeps it from a 5.

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 supplies the return shape, error semantics for the unbound case, undoability, and the no-recompile save behavior, which is nearly everything an agent needs. The one notable omission is the Play-in-Editor refusal, which is only surfaced via the schema's force parameter.

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% and each of the 8 parameters (including the PIE caveat on force and the alias chain for anim_blueprint_path) is documented in-schema, so the schema carries the burden. The description references node_id/pin_name only implicitly through the returns list and adds no format or constraint detail beyond the schema.

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 precise verb+resource (remove the property binding from one input pin of an AnimGraph node) and explicitly names the sibling it inverts, set_anim_graph_node_pin_binding, so an agent can distinguish it from set_anim_graph_node_pin_binding and the broader node-editing tools without opening schemas.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The 'inverse of set_anim_graph_node_pin_binding' framing and the 'dropping a stale binding without recreating the node' rationale give clear context for when to reach for this rather than re-setting the binding. It does not state explicit exclusions or a when-not-to-use case, so it stops short of a 5.

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