Skip to main content
Glama
CarlxsMG

UEAgent

by CarlxsMG
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

read_data_table_row_complex

Read-onlyIdempotent

Reads a DataTable row with every cell serialized as ExportText, exposing TMaps, nested struct arrays and soft references that standard row reads return as {}.

Instructions

Read one DataTable row with every cell as its ExportText string, so TMap<Enum,SoftClass>, nested struct arrays and soft references appear in full (get_data_table_row shows TMaps as {}); read-only. Returns row_struct and fields as {column: text}; a missing row is an error.

Returns: { table_path, row_name, row_struct, fields:{column: exporttext-serialized value} }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
row_nameYesName (key) of the row to read
data_tableNoFull asset path of the DataTable (table_path also accepted)
table_pathNoAlias of data_table (the DataTable asset path, e.g. "/Game/Data/DT_Items"); data_table wins when both are given

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.2.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / table_path / description
      Added value: +"Alias of data_table (the DataTable asset path, e.g. \"/Game/Data/DT_Items\"); data_table wins when both are given"
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "data_table",
-  "row_name"
-]New value: +[
+  "row_name"
+]
  2. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine context beyond that: it explains the ExportText serialization behavior, the exact return payload shape, and that a missing row is an error rather than an empty result.

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 crucial differentiator (full ExportText vs sibling's {}) and the read-only flag, then the return shape. The trailing 'Returns: {...}' sentence partially restates the earlier 'Returns row_struct and fields as {column: text}' line, a small redundancy that keeps it from a 5.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so by naming the four returned keys and the per-column value format. It also covers error behavior for a missing row. It omits pagination/batching considerations, but for a single-row read that is minor.

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%, so row_name, data_table and its table_path alias are already fully documented, including the precedence rule when both are given. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 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 DataTable row) with a precise scope: every cell as ExportText so complex types like TMap<Enum,SoftClass> and nested struct arrays come through. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling get_data_table_row by noting that sibling shows TMaps as {}, so an agent can choose between them without opening either schema.

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?

Names the alternative (get_data_table_row) and the condition that selects this tool (when complex/TMap/soft-reference data must appear in full). It does not state an explicit 'when not to use' beyond that comparison, but the routing signal is clear and actionable.

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