Skip to main content
Glama
CarlxsMG

UEAgent

by CarlxsMG
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

get_component_events

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve lifecycle, activation, registration, transform, and input events for an actor component. Inspect event signatures and override status to plan Blueprint logic.

Instructions

Retrieve lifecycle, activation, registration, transform, and input events available on a component.

Returns: { actor_name: string, component_name: string, component_class: string, component_category: string, component_tooltip: string, component_display_name: string, events: [{name, type, description, category, is_overrideable, is_blueprint_event, function_signature}], events_count: int, component_is_active: bool, component_is_registered: bool, component_owner: string, component_creation_method: string }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actor_nameYesName of the actor containing the component
component_nameYesName of the component to get events from

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already carry the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the bar is lower. The description adds value by documenting the return shape in detail, which substitutes for the missing output schema. It still omits any auth requirements, cost, or pagination behavior, so it is not exhaustive.

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 is front-loaded in a single sentence, followed by a clearly delimited Returns block. The return enumeration is long but each field earns its place given there is no output schema. No filler prose.

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?

For a read-only getter, annotations cover safety and the description fully spells out return fields, compensating for the absent output schema. The main gap is the lack of usage/routing guidance, but within this dimension the definition supplies enough to call the tool 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% with only two parameters, both already documented in the schema. The description's 'on a component' phrase implies the component_name input but adds no syntax, format, or constraint detail beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource ('Retrieve ... events ... on a component') and even enumerates the event categories (lifecycle, activation, registration, transform, input), so the scope is unambiguous. It does not explicitly name or contrast against siblings like get_blueprint_components_list or get_component_properties, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative guidance. The description never tells the agent what conditions call for this tool versus the many other component/blueprint inspection siblings, leaving routing to inference.

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