Skip to main content
Glama

remove_viewmodel

DestructiveIdempotent

Removes a named ViewModel context from a Widget Blueprint's MVVM authoring state; already-absent contexts succeed idempotently.

Instructions

Remove a UMVVMViewModelContext (by context name) from a Widget BP's MVVM authoring state. Inverse of add_viewmodel; idempotent (already-absent is an honest success).

Returns: { widget_blueprint_name, context_name, already_existed, removed, view_model_count, has_mvvm_extension, saved, save_error? }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
forceNoOptional. This command is REFUSED while a Play-in-Editor session is running: it either compiles a Blueprint (the reinstancer can retain a world, and CheckForWorldGCLeaks is Fatal -- it KILLS the editor) or writes to disk (Editor.AllowSavingAssetsDuringPIE=0 makes the engine refuse the write, so it would report success without writing a byte). Stop PIE and retry instead; force=true runs it anyway, at your own risk.
context_nameYesFName identifying the context to remove (idempotency key)
widget_blueprint_nameYes/Game path of the Widget Blueprint asset (string)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 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, readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description earns extra credit by spelling out the idempotency semantics ('already-absent is an honest success') and enumerating the return payload, which the annotations alone cannot convey.

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: the operation and its idempotency are front-loaded, followed by a compact return field list. No 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?

With no output schema, the inline Returns block usefully documents the response including the save_error optional field, which removes ambiguity for a non-readOnly mutation. It is essentially complete for calling the tool correctly.

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 the schema already documents widget_blueprint_name, context_name and the force/PIE constraint. The description adds only 'by context name', which is redundant with 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 (Remove), resource (UMVVMViewModelContext, keyed by context name) and scope (a Widget BP's MVVM authoring state). Naming add_viewmodel as the inverse lets an agent place it against the relevant sibling 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?

The 'inverse of add_viewmodel' framing gives clear context for when this tool applies. It does not address near siblings such as unbind_widget_from_viewmodel or remove_widget, and states no explicit when-not, so it falls short of a full 5.

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