Skip to main content
Glama

set_project_settings_value

DestructiveIdempotent

Set a Unreal project settings property, persist it to the versioned Config/Default*.ini, then re-read the file from disk to verify the change landed.

Instructions

Write a UDeveloperSettings property, persist it to the VERSIONED Config/Default*.ini (TryUpdateDefaultConfigFile for defaultconfig classes, SaveConfig otherwise) and re-read that .ini FROM DISK to prove it landed.

Returns: { class_name: string, property_name: string, round_tripped_value: string, ini_path: string, is_default_config_class: bool, versioned_ini: bool, write_reported: bool, persist_method: string, ini_section: string, ini_key: string, property_is_config: bool, disk_present: bool, disk_value: string, disk_values: [string], disk_matches_memory: bool, verification: object, verification_checks: [object] }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
valueYesNew value as a string (ImportText format)
class_nameYesClass short name or /Script/Module.Class path
verify_diskNoOptional bool, default true. Re-read the target .ini with FConfigFile::Read (never GConfig, which is the in-memory cache and would just echo the write back) and report disk_value / disk_matches_memory.
property_nameYesName of the property on the settings class

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructive=true and idempotent=true, and the description adds real value on top: it names TryUpdateDefaultConfigFile vs SaveConfig, explains the write lands in the VERSIONED Config/Default*.ini, and discloses the disk re-read via FConfigFile::Read deliberately bypassing GConfig so verification isn't an in-memory echo.

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 action is front-loaded in the first clause and every element earns its place, including the lengthy Returns block which substitutes for the absent output schema. The first sentence is dense but not padded.

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?

Given no output schema, the description supplies the full return shape and explains the persistence/verification behavior for a high-complexity mutation tool. Only the usage-vs-alternatives angle is thin.

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 baseline is 3. The description explains the write/verify mechanics but adds no per-parameter meaning beyond the schema (e.g. ImportText format for `value` and the verify_disk default are already documented in the schema).

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 (Write) and resource (a UDeveloperSettings property) and names the sibling it complements rather than replaces (get_project_settings_value). The mechanism (persist to versioned Config/Default*.ini) makes the scope unambiguous.

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?

Usage is implied by the verb 'write' and the persistence detail, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement and no named alternative such as set_engine_ini_value or set_project_settings_value's getter sibling. The agent must infer the trigger condition.

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