Skip to main content
Glama

get_actor_components

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists all components on an Unreal actor in the editor or PIE world, with names, classes, active state, and mesh or light details.

Instructions

List every component on one actor in the editor OR the live PIE world: name, class, is_active, plus mesh/light details. Accepts world='editor'|'pie'|'server'|'client'|'pie:N' ('server' = the PIE world with authority, 'client' = the other one) and stamps world_name/world_package/net_mode/pie_instance so a co-op reading says WHICH world it came from. Use this to discover component names; then get_component_properties (also world-aware) for their values -- reading with the default world='editor' returns the pre-BeginPlay archetype, not the running actor.

Returns: { actor_name: string, actor_class: string, world: string, components: [{ name: string, class: string, is_active: bool, is_editable: bool, type?: string, mesh_name?: string, intensity?: number, light_color?: string }], components_count: number, world_name: string|null, world_package: string|null, world_type: string|null, net_mode: string|null, pie_instance: number }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
worldNoOptional world selector: absent/'editor' (default) | 'pie' (ambiguous: PlayWorld, else the first PIE context) | 'server' (the PIE world with authority) | 'client' | 'pie:N' | 'game' (alias of 'pie').
actor_nameYesActor's internal name (GetName) or editor label (GetActorLabel); exact match, not a substring.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), so the bar is lower, and the description adds real value: the editor-default-returns-archetype caveat and the statement that results are stamped with world_name/world_package/net_mode/pie_instance so a co-op reading identifies its source. It stops short of covering rate limits or cost, keeping it at 4 rather than 5.

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?

Purpose and world semantics are front-loaded in the first two sentences, and the trailing Returns block is justified because no output schema exists. The prose is dense and slightly run-on (a long parenthetical plus a double-em-dash clause), which costs a point but not comprehension.

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 declared, embedding the full return shape (actor_name, components array with per-field types, world stamps) in the description is exactly the right compensation. Combined with the world-selection guidance, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret the tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description goes beyond the schema by explaining the semantics of the ambiguous values ('server' = the PIE world with authority, 'client' = the other one) and the practical consequence of the 'editor' default. This adds interpretive meaning the schema syntax alone would not convey.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource ("List every component on one actor") and immediately scopes it to two worlds (editor or live PIE). It names the sibling it complements (get_component_properties) and enumerates the fields returned, so an agent can distinguish it from other get_* introspection tools without opening the schema.

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?

It states explicitly when to use it ("discover component names") and the follow-up tool for the complementary task ("then get_component_properties ... for their values"). It also flags the trap condition directly: reading with default world='editor' returns the pre-BeginPlay archetype, not the running actor.

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