Skip to main content
Glama
CarlxsMG

UEAgent

by CarlxsMG
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

connect_pins

Destructive

Wire an output pin to an input pin inside a Blueprint graph with K2 type checking, returning an error for incompatible pairs instead of a silent no-op.

Instructions

Wire one node's OUTPUT pin to another node's INPUT pin inside one Blueprint graph, type-checked by the K2 schema (an incompatible pair is returned as an error, never a silent no-op). Nodes are addressed by NodeGuid, pins by name. Either node that still carries a WILDCARD pin is reconstructed afterwards, so array / ForEach / Select pins really re-type instead of compiling into "The type of Target Array is undetermined" (which compile_blueprint reports as compiled:true). Use validate_pin_connection to test a pair without mutating, and build_blueprint_graph to create+wire in one transaction.

Returns: { connected, source_node_id, target_node_id } -- connected is always true when the call succeeds; the failure path is an error response, so there is no false to check.

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. BOTH nodes must live in this same graph.
source_pinYesOutput pin name on the source node (e.g. "then", "ReturnValue"). An output pin of that name is preferred; any pin with the name is accepted as a fallback.
target_pinYesInput pin name on the target node (e.g. "execute", "Condition").
blueprint_nameNoBlueprint name or path.
blueprint_pathNoAlias of `blueprint_name` (same value, same meaning). Accepted because sibling tools spell this parameter differently; prefer `blueprint_name`.
source_node_idYesNodeGuid of the source node (from add_graph_node / get_graph_nodes).
target_node_idYesNodeGuid of the target node.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, readOnlyHint=false, so the mutation/safety profile is known from structured data. The description adds genuine behavior beyond that: incompatible pin pairs return an error rather than a silent no-op, and nodes carrying a WILDCARD pin are reconstructed so array/ForEach/Select pins re-type instead of compiling into 'The type of Target Array is undetermined' even when compile_blueprint reports compiled:true.

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 verb+resource, and each subsequent sentence carries distinct value (type-check semantics, wildcard reconstruction, alternatives, return contract). It is dense and slightly long, but no sentence is pure filler.

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 an 8-param graph-mutation tool with no output schema, the description explicitly documents the return shape ({connected, source_node_id, target_node_id}) and clarifies that connected is always true on success because the failure path is an error response. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing, especially with annotations covering the safety profile.

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 every parameter (including the detailed force/PIE caveat and the blueprint_path alias) is already documented in the schema; baseline is 3. The description adds only the cross-parameter convention 'Nodes are addressed by NodeGuid, pins by name', a mild restatement of what the schema already encodes.

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+scope: wire one node's OUTPUT pin to another node's INPUT pin inside one Blueprint graph, with K2 type-checking. It is clearly differentiable from the many other connect_* siblings (connect_anim_graph_pins, connect_metasound_nodes, connect_material_expressions) by naming the Blueprint graph context and NodeGuid/pin-name addressing.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: use validate_pin_connection to test a pair without mutating, and build_blueprint_graph to create+wire in one transaction. It also frames the error-vs-no-op contract and the PIE refusal condition (via the force param), so the agent knows when this tool is appropriate and when it is blocked.

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