Skip to main content
Glama
CarlxsMG

UEAgent

by CarlxsMG
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

duplicate_niagara_emitter_handle

Duplicate a Niagara emitter handle with a new name, keep its enabled state, and save the system. Use get_niagara_emitter_handles to find handle names.

Instructions

Duplicate an emitter handle of a Niagara System asset under a new name, keeping its enabled state, then save the system. Returns the actual name and id of the copy plus total_emitters; a failed save is not reported in the reply. Find handle names with get_niagara_emitter_handles.

Returns: { system_path: string, source_emitter_name: string, new_emitter_name: string, new_emitter_id: string, is_valid: bool, total_emitters: int }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
system_pathYesNiagara System asset path, e.g. "/Game/FX/NS_Fire"; the call fails without it.
new_emitter_nameNoName for the copy (default "<source_emitter_name>_Copy").
source_emitter_nameYesDisplay name of the emitter handle to copy (case-insensitive), as get_niagara_emitter_handles lists it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.2.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / new_emitter_name / description
      Previous value: -"Optional name for the duplicate; defaults to \"<source>_Copy\""New value: +"Name for the copy (default \"<source_emitter_name>_Copy\")."
    • changedInput schema / properties / source_emitter_name / description
      Previous value: -"Display name of the emitter handle to duplicate."New value: +"Display name of the emitter handle to copy (case-insensitive), as get_niagara_emitter_handles lists it."
    • changedInput schema / properties / system_path / description
      Previous value: -"Asset path of the Niagara System."New value: +"Niagara System asset path, e.g. \"/Game/FX/NS_Fire\"; the call fails without it."
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "source_emitter_name"
-]New value: +[
+  "system_path",
+  "source_emitter_name"
+]
  2. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (write, non-idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), and the description adds real behavioral context beyond them: the copy preserves enabled state, the system is saved as a side effect, and a failed save is silently not reported. It stops short of stating failure behavior for a missing source emitter or any permission requirements.

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 purpose sentence, then the secondary caveat, then a compact returns block. The returns shape is repeated between the prose sentence and the explicit Returns line, which is mild redundancy, but every other sentence earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the description supplies the full return shape (system_path, source/new names and id, is_valid, total_emitters) and the save side effect plus its silent-failure caveat. For a 3-parameter mutation whose annotations already carry the safety profile, this is sufficient for an agent to call it 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 all three parameters (including the new_emitter_name default) are already documented in the schema. The description's mention of a "new name" and of using get_niagara_emitter_handles as the source of names restates what the schema already says, adding no new semantics; 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+resource (duplicate an emitter handle of a Niagara System) plus the differentiating behaviors: the copy keeps the source's enabled state and the system is saved. It also names the sibling used to discover input names (get_niagara_emitter_handles), so an agent can separate it from add_niagara_emitter_handle and duplicate_niagara_module_in_stack.

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?

Gives clear prerequisite context ("Find handle names with get_niagara_emitter_handles") so the agent knows where the source_emitter_name comes from. It does not spell out when to prefer this over adding a new emitter or duplicating a module, so there are no explicit exclusions.

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