Skip to main content
Glama

get_plugin_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check if a plugin is enabled and read its version, author, category, dependencies, and modules in Unreal Engine by name.

Instructions

Read one plugin by name, read-only: Enabled or Disabled, version, author, category, base dir, .uplugin file, dependencies and modules. An unknown name returns plugin_status "Not Found" with "N/A" fields, not an error. plugin_loaded only mirrors plugin_enabled, and plugin_created_date holds the CreatedByURL.

Returns: { plugin_name: string, plugin_status: string, plugin_version: string, plugin_description: string, plugin_author: string, plugin_created_date: string, plugin_category: string, plugin_loaded: bool, plugin_enabled: bool, plugin_path: string, plugin_file: string, plugin_dependencies: [{ name: string, enabled: bool, optional: bool, version: string }], plugin_modules: [{ name: string, type: string, loading_phase: bool }], plugin_message: string, plugin_manager_version: string, plugin_search_paths: string, plugin_status_timestamp: string }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
plugin_nameYesName of the plugin to query, as its .uplugin file is named (e.g. "UEAgent")

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.2.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / plugin_name / description
      Previous value: -"Name of the plugin to query"New value: +"Name of the plugin to query, as its .uplugin file is named (e.g. \"UEAgent\")"
  2. 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 readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: an unknown name returns plugin_status 'Not Found' with 'N/A' fields rather than an error, plus the quirks that plugin_loaded merely mirrors plugin_enabled and plugin_created_date holds the CreatedByURL. That is real value beyond the structured fields, though nothing is said about permissions or source-control interactions.

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 verb, resource and scope, and the edge-case behavior arrives before the long Returns block. The return dump is lengthy but justified because no output schema is declared, so every field earns its place; only minor density costs it a perfect score.

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 present, the description carries the full return contract and does so explicitly, including nested dependency and module field shapes, error semantics, and field quirks. Nothing an agent needs to invoke and interpret this read tool correctly is missing.

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?

Only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, with the schema itself explaining the .uplugin naming convention. The description restates 'by name' but adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 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 ('Read one plugin by name') and immediately scopes what is returned (Enabled/Disabled, version, author, category, dependencies, modules). This clearly distinguishes it from mutating siblings like enable_plugin/disable_plugin. An agent can identify the tool 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 Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by 'Read one plugin by name, read-only' and reinforced by the unknown-name edge case, but the description never names an alternative or states an explicit when-to-use condition relative to siblings. There is no sibling that reads single-plugin status, so the gap is modest, but no routing guidance is given.

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