Skip to main content
Glama

create_material

Create a new base UMaterial asset in Unreal Engine, the master material whose parameters and static switches all its instances inherit. Use it when no existing material can be re-skinned as an instance.

Instructions

Create a new base material asset (UMaterial) -- the graph-owning master whose parameters and static switches every instance of it inherits. Prefer create_material_instance / create_material_instance_constant when you only need a re-skin of something that exists: an instance costs no new shader permutations and leaves the original updatable. After creating, build the graph with create_material_expression + connect_material_expressions, then verify with get_material_stats (compile_errors empty and stats_valid true) -- compile_material only acknowledges, it does not report errors, and a landscape material that fails to compile silently falls back to the default material.

Returns: { material_path: string (object path of the new material, '/Game/Materials/M_X.M_X'), material_name: string, package_path: string, success: bool } -- an existing asset of that name is an error, never overwritten

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
material_nameYesName of the material asset to create
material_pathYesContent FOLDER the material is created in (e.g., '/Game/Materials')

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly=false, destructive=false, idempotent=false), and the description adds genuinely new behavior: name collisions are an error and assets are 'never overwritten', compile_material only acknowledges rather than reporting errors, and a failing landscape material silently falls back to default. These failure-mode disclosures go well beyond the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose is front-loaded, followed by the alternative-routing rule, the workflow, the verification caveat, and the return shape. Despite the density, every sentence carries actionable information and none is redundant 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?

There is no output schema, but the description supplies the full return object shape (material_path, material_name, package_path, success) plus the error behavior on name collision. For a create tool this is complete enough to invoke and interpret correctly.

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 both parameters are already documented, establishing a baseline of 3. The description adds the collision semantics for material_name but no new syntax or format detail for the parameters themselves, so it does not exceed the schema's contribution.

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 ('Create a new base material asset (UMaterial)') and immediately explains the concept that distinguishes it ('the graph-owning master whose parameters and static switches every instance of it inherits'). It explicitly names the siblings it is not (create_material_instance / create_material_instance_constant), so an agent can route 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 Guidelines5/5

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

Gives an explicit when-to-use alternative ('Prefer create_material_instance / create_material_instance_constant when you only need a re-skin of something that exists') with a rationale (no new shader permutations, original stays updatable). It also supplies the follow-up workflow (build graph, then verify with get_material_stats) and warns that compile_material does not report errors.

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