Skip to main content
Glama
CarlxsMG

UEAgent

by CarlxsMG
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

remove_transition_condition

Destructive

Delete one condition by index from a StateTree state transition and save the asset. Out-of-range condition index removes nothing and returns removed false.

Instructions

Remove one condition, by index, from a transition of a StateTree state and save the asset. An out-of-range transition_index is an error; an out-of-range condition_index removes nothing and still succeeds, with removed false. Returns removed, remaining and saved.

Returns: { tree_path, state_name, transition_index, condition_index, removed, remaining, saved, note }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tree_pathYesAsset path of the StateTree, e.g. "/Game/AI/ST_Guard".
state_nameYesName of the state that owns the transition; the command fails without it.
condition_indexYes0-based index into the Conditions of that transition.
transition_indexYes0-based index into the state transitions, as listed by list_transitions.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changedv1.2.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / condition_index / description
      Previous value: -"0-based index into the transition's Conditions."New value: +"0-based index into the Conditions of that transition."
    • changedInput schema / properties / state_name / description
      Previous value: -"Name of the state."New value: +"Name of the state that owns the transition; the command fails without it."
    • changedInput schema / properties / transition_index / description
      Previous value: -"0-based index into State->Transitions."New value: +"0-based index into the state transitions, as listed by list_transitions."
    • changedInput schema / properties / tree_path / description
      Previous value: -"Asset path."New value: +"Asset path of the StateTree, e.g. \"/Game/AI/ST_Guard\"."
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "tree_path",
-  "transition_index",
-  "condition_index"
-]New value: +[
+  "tree_path",
+  "state_name",
+  "transition_index",
+  "condition_index"
+]
  2. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds real value beyond them: the asset is saved, an out-of-range transition_index is a hard error while an out-of-range condition_index is a silent no-op that still succeeds with removed=false. That partial-success nuance is exactly what an agent needs before calling a mutating tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight sentences plus a compact return list. The core operation and its scope are front-loaded, followed by the highest-risk edge case, with zero filler.

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 output schema, so the description carries return-value duty and does list the returned fields (removed, remaining, saved, note). Combined with the error/no-op semantics this is nearly complete for a destructive indexed-edit tool; it could briefly state why 'remaining' matters (count after removal) but nothing essential 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 all four parameters are documented in the schema and the baseline would be 3. The description earns an extra point by explaining the contrasting failure semantics of transition_index and condition_index, adding meaning the schema does not carry.

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 and resource ('Remove one condition, by index, from a transition of a StateTree state and save the asset') with the exact scope of 'one condition' at a given index. This granularity distinguishes it from the remove_transition sibling that removes a whole transition, without needing to name it.

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?

Describes edge cases at length but never routes the agent to alternatives—no mention of add_transition_condition for the inverse, list_conditions for indices, or remove_transition for removing the whole transition. Usage is implied rather than explicit.

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