Skip to main content
Glama

set_motion_warping_target_location

DestructiveIdempotent

Update an existing motion warping target's location and rotation by FName. Use this to reposition an existing target instead of creating a new one.

Instructions

Update an existing FMotionWarpingTarget's location (and optionally rotation) by FName -- an idempotent replace-in-place. Choose this over add_warp_target_to_component when the target already exists and you only want to nudge where it points; add_warp_target_to_component is the one that CREATES a target.

Returns: { actor_name, warp_target_name, location_set, previous_count, new_count }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
locationNo[x, y, z] world location
rotationNoPREFERRED: the OBJECT {"roll":R,"pitch":P,"yaw":Y} (any subset, absent axes are 0). The ARRAY form below is [pitch, yaw, roll] -- its index 2 is ROLL, NOT yaw, which once put a PlayerStart on its side. Optional [pitch, yaw, roll] rotation; defaults to ZeroRotator
actor_nameYesEngine name of the actor carrying the UMotionWarpingComponent
warp_target_nameYesFName of the existing target

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=true, so safety/idempotency is partly covered; the description reinforces 'idempotent replace-in-place' and adds return details (previous_count, new_count) plus the fact that rotation is optional. It does not explain what 'destructive' means concretely (overwriting the prior location), leaving a minor gap.

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 front-loaded sentences state the operation, its idempotent nature, and the routing decision, followed by a compact return shape. No filler; every clause earns its place.

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 supplies the return shape, and it covers identity, idempotency, and the sibling alternative for a mutation tool. The only shortfall is that it doesn't spell out what the destructive overwrite implies for existing data.

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 documents all four parameters itself. The description only echoes 'by FName' and that rotation is optional, adding no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 (Update), resource (an existing FMotionWarpingTarget's location, optionally rotation), and lookup key (by FName). It directly names the sibling it is not (add_warp_target_to_component) so an agent can distinguish the two without opening schemas.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly gives the selection rule: choose this when the target already exists and you only want to nudge it, versus add_warp_target_to_component which CREATES one. Names the alternative and the condition that selects it, leaving nothing to inference.

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