Skip to main content
Glama

get_anim_state_machine_info

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read one Animation Blueprint state machine's nodes without compiling or editing it: count states, conduits, and transitions, and list state, conduit, and alias nodes with kind and graph position.

Instructions

Read the nodes of one state machine of an Animation Blueprint without compiling or changing it: state_count counts the states, conduit_count the conduits and transition_count the transitions; states lists every state, conduit and alias node with its kind (class name) and graph position, transitions excluded.

Returns: { state_machine, state_count, conduit_count, transition_count, states:[{name,kind,x,y}] }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
machine_nameNoAlias of `state_machine_name` (same value, same meaning). Accepted because sibling tools spell this parameter differently; prefer `state_machine_name`.
blueprint_nameNoAlias of `anim_blueprint_path` (same value, same meaning). Accepted because sibling tools spell this parameter differently; prefer `anim_blueprint_path`.
state_machine_nameNoName of the state machine
anim_blueprint_pathNoAsset path of the UAnimBlueprint

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered by structured data. The description still adds real value beyond that: the no-recompile guarantee and the explicit exclusion of transitions from the states list are behavioral facts the annotations cannot express.

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?

Front-loads the action and its key constraint, then moves to field semantics, then to an explicit return shape. No filler sentences; every clause carries information, and the return-shape block is justified because there is no output schema.

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 compensates by inlining the return object, and it covers the read-only/no-compile behavior. It does not mention the alias parameters or which identifier the agent should pass, but with 0 required params and 100% schema documentation that gap is minor.

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 the schema itself explains the alias pairings (machine_name/state_machine_name, blueprint_name/anim_blueprint_path) plus the preference order. The description adds no parameter meaning of its own, so the 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?

The description opens with a precise verb+resource+scope: 'Read the nodes of one state machine of an Animation Blueprint without compiling or changing it.' The 'one state machine' scoping cleanly distinguishes it from list_anim_state_machines, and the enumerated field semantics (state_count, conduit_count, transition_count, states) tell the agent exactly what is returned without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied rather than stated: 'without compiling or changing it' contrasts implicitly with compile_anim_blueprint and validate_anim_state_machine, but no sibling is named and there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance versus get_anim_blueprint_info or list_anim_state_machines.

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