Skip to main content
Glama

set_physics_body_properties

DestructiveIdempotent

Set the physics type or mass override for a specific body in a UPhysicsAsset, identified by body index or bone name, then save the asset.

Instructions

Set the physics type and/or a mass override on one body of a UPhysicsAsset, chosen by body_index or else bone_name, in an undo transaction, then save the asset. Only the fields you pass change; passing neither is an error and nothing is written. An asset with no bodies, no body found or an unknown physics_type is an error, checked before any write. mass_override_enabled is read back from the body. success is false, with save_error, when the save fails (during PIE, for one). For damping, gravity, mass scale or centre of mass use set_physics_body_advanced_properties; get_physics_asset_info reads the body count.

Returns: { physics_asset_path, body_index, bone_name, physics_type, physics_type_applied, mass_override_enabled, mass, mass_applied, updated, saved, save_error }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
massNoMass override in kilograms; also switches the mass override on. Omit to keep the current mass
bone_nameNoBone whose body to configure, used when body_index is absent
body_indexNo0-based index of the body in the asset; wins over bone_name when both are given
physics_typeNoBody physics type (Default|Kinematic|Simulated), case-insensitive; omit to keep the current one
physics_asset_pathYes/Game path to the UPhysicsAsset.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.2.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / body_index / description
      Previous value: -"Explicit index of the body to configure"New value: +"0-based index of the body in the asset; wins over bone_name when both are given"
    • changedInput schema / properties / bone_name / description
      Previous value: -"Name of the skeleton bone"New value: +"Bone whose body to configure, used when body_index is absent"
    • changedInput schema / properties / mass / description
      Previous value: -"Mass override in kilograms"New value: +"Mass override in kilograms; also switches the mass override on. Omit to keep the current mass"
    • changedInput schema / properties / physics_type / description
      Previous value: -"Body physics type (Default|Kinematic|Simulated)"New value: +"Body physics type (Default|Kinematic|Simulated), case-insensitive; omit to keep the current one"
  2. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare the safety profile; the description adds substantial behavior beyond that: the write runs in an undo transaction, the asset is saved afterward, validation happens before any write, and success is false with save_error when saving fails (e.g. during PIE). This is exactly the mutation context an agent needs.

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?

The write/scope constraint is front-loaded, followed by error conditions, an alternative-tool pointer, and the return shape. Every sentence carries information, but the description is dense and could be tightened slightly without losing meaning.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a mutating tool with no output schema, the description supplies the return field list, the read-back semantics (mass_override_enabled, applied fields), and full failure modes. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly 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 the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning: it clarifies that mass_override_enabled is read back from the body after the call and that an unknown physics_type is a hard error. That goes beyond the per-parameter schema text, though the field-by-field semantics are largely already documented.

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?

Names a specific verb (Set), resource (physics type and mass override on one body of a UPhysicsAsset), and scope (a single body selected by body_index/bone_name). An agent can distinguish it immediately from sibling setters like set_physics_body_advanced_properties or get_physics_asset_info.

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 states when it applies ('only the fields you pass change; passing neither is an error and nothing is written') and routes to alternatives ('for damping, gravity, mass scale or centre of mass use set_physics_body_advanced_properties; get_physics_asset_info reads the body count'). Error preconditions (no bodies, no body found, unknown physics_type) are spelled out.

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