Skip to main content
Glama
CarlxsMG

UEAgent

by CarlxsMG
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

move_track_to_folder

DestructiveIdempotent

Move a master track (by class) or an object-binding (by GUID) into a named Sequencer folder and save the sequence in an undo transaction.

Instructions

Move a master track (by class) or an object-binding (by GUID) into a named Sequencer folder, inside an undo transaction, and save the sequence; success requires the save. Idempotent: a track or binding already in the folder succeeds with already_present true and saved false (nothing is written).

Returns: { sequence_path: string, folder_name: string, track_class: string, track_name: string, binding_guid: string, moved: bool, already_present: bool, saved: bool, save_error?: string }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
track_nameNoOptional track name to disambiguate when several tracks share the class.
folder_nameYesName of the destination folder (searched recursively).
track_classNoClass name of the master track to move (e.g. "MovieSceneCameraCutTrack"). Mutually exclusive with binding_guid.
binding_guidNoGUID of an object-binding to move into the folder. Mutually exclusive with track_class.
sequence_nameNoAlias for sequence_path.
sequence_pathNoAsset path OR bare asset name of the target Level Sequence.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

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

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly=false, destructive=true, idempotent=true), the description discloses that the move runs inside an undo transaction, that success is contingent on the save, and precisely what the idempotent path does (already_present true, saved false, nothing written). That is meaningful extra context, though permission/authorization requirements are not covered.

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 core action and scoping, then a compact Returns block. The two sentences and the return-shape line are information-dense with little waste, only marginally long.

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?

There is no structured output schema, but the description inlines the return shape and explains the idempotent/save state flags, so an agent has what it needs to call and interpret results. A note on permissions or failure modes other than save_error would complete it.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the mutual exclusivity of track_class and binding_guid and the alias role of sequence_name. The description adds the same two-mode framing but no formatting or syntax detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb (move) and resource (master track or object-binding) with the destination, and clearly distinguishes the two addressing modes (by class vs by GUID). An agent can identify this as a Sequencer folder-mutation 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?

It explains the two input modes and notes that success requires a save, which implies when the tool is useful, but it never names an alternative sibling (e.g. add_sequence_folder, set_actor_folder) or states when NOT to use it. Usage is implied rather than routed.

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