Skip to main content
Glama

get_current_level

Read-onlyIdempotent

Reports the active level's name, package path, filename, dirty state, and actor count for editor or PIE worlds, flagging /Engine/ templates to prevent engine map overwrites.

Instructions

Which map a world is sitting on: level_name, its package_name (/Game/... or /Engine/...), the resolved disk filename, whether the package is dirty, and a live actor count. package_name is the discriminator that catches the classic mistake -- if it starts with /Engine/ you are on an engine template (what new_level leaves behind) and a save_level without filename would overwrite the ENGINE's own map. Defaults to the EDITOR world; it also takes the standard world selector, so during PIE you can ask the play world ('pie'/'server'/'client'/'pie:N') instead of being told about the authoring map and having no way to know it.

Returns: { level_name: string, package_name: string (the /Game or /Engine path -- read this one), filename: string, is_dirty: bool, actor_count: int, world: string (the normalized selector that resolved), world_name: string, world_package: string (the UEDPIE_N prefix lives HERE, not in world_name), world_type: string ("Editor" | "PIE" | ...), net_mode: string, pie_instance: int }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
worldNoOptional world selector: absent/'editor' (default -- the authoring map even while PIE runs) | 'pie' (ambiguous: PlayWorld, else the first PIE context) | 'game' (alias of 'pie') | 'server' (the PIE world with authority) | 'client' | 'pie:N'. Case-insensitive; an unrecognised value is a clean error listing the worlds present, never a silent fallback to the editor world.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare this a safe, idempotent, non-destructive read, so the bar is lower, yet the description adds real behavioral context: the /Engine vs /Game hazard, the warning that a save_level without `filename` would overwrite the engine map, and that an unrecognised selector errors cleanly rather than silently falling back.

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 with the purpose and scoping, but the prose is dense and the inline Returns block is long. Since there is no output schema, that block earns its place, though it could be tightened.

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 (including the subtlety that the UEDPIE_N prefix lives in world_package, not world_name) and the default/selector semantics. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 schema already enumerates every selector value; the description reinforces this with rationale (why 'pie' is ambiguous, why defaults matter) and adds the resolution behavior on bad input. It adds meaning rather than merely repeating, though the gain over the schema is modest.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource ('Which map a world is sitting on') and enumerates exactly what it resolves (level_name, package_name, filename, dirty flag, actor count). The /Engine vs /Game discriminator makes the tool's identity unmistakable against siblings like get_world_net_mode or get_net_role.

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?

Clearly states the default (EDITOR world) and the PIE use case where the selector is needed, plus the consequence of misreading package_name. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool to use instead for other needs, so it stops just short of the top band.

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