Skip to main content
Glama
CarlxsMG

UEAgent

by CarlxsMG
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

list_transitions

Read-onlyIdempotent

Enumerate all transitions of a state in a UStateTree, showing target, trigger, condition count, delay, and priority. Use this to inspect state machine logic.

Instructions

List all transitions of a state, with their target name, trigger event, conditions count, delay, and priority.

Returns: { tree_path, state_name, count, transitions: [{ index, target, trigger, condition_count, delay, priority }] }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tree_pathYesAsset path to the UStateTree.
state_nameYesName of the state.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.2.0
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "tree_path"
-]New value: +[
+  "tree_path",
+  "state_name"
+]
  2. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and no destructive/openWorld behavior. The description adds the complete return shape, target, trigger, condition_count, delay, priority, which is useful context since no output schema exists, though it does not discuss side effects or error behavior.

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?

Two sentences plus a compact return shape. The field list in the first sentence is repeated in the return statement, but the structure is front-loaded and easy to scan.

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 two-parameter read tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the description supplies the missing return shape and scope. It omits prerequisites like valid asset path or state existence, but that is not severe.

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% for both parameters. The description restates that transitions belong to a state but adds no format or syntax details beyond the schema's tree_path and state_name descriptions.

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 (List) and resource (transitions of a state) and enumerates the returned fields. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling transition-inspection tools, but the scope is clear.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or exclusions. It implies inspecting a state's transitions but does not mention alternatives such as update_transition, remove_transition, or add_state_transition, nor prerequisites for obtaining tree_path and state_name.

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