Skip to main content
Glama

set_properties

DestructiveIdempotent

Batch-write multiple properties on one Unreal Engine editor-world object in one call, returning per-property set and failed results for verification.

Instructions

Batch-write several properties on ONE object instance in a single call, reporting set[] and failed[{property,error}] per name instead of one opaque flag; each write goes through the same CPF_Edit/!EditConst gate and Modify/PreEditChange/PostEditChange notification as set_property_value. WARNING: EDITOR-WORLD ONLY (no world parameter) and success only means the import did not error — re-read the values (get_properties / list_instance_overrides) before believing it, especially for FGameplayTag on a placed actor, which reports success and leaves the tag empty.

Returns: { object_path: string, set: [string], failed: [{property, error}], success: bool }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
propertiesNoDict of {property_name: value}; values can be scalar, nested object, or array (UE-format text like "(X=1,Y=2,Z=3)" is also accepted for structs)
object_pathYesPath or name of the object instance, resolved in the EDITOR world: full object path, asset path, CDO/archetype, or a dotted "Actor[.Component[.Subobject]]" whose first segment is the actor's internal name.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: discloses the CPF_Edit/!EditConst gate, the Modify/PreEditChange/PostEditChange notification path, an editor-world-only constraint, per-name set/failed reporting, and a critical success-semantics caveat (success only means no import error; FGameplayTag silently fails on placed actors). None of this repeats the structured annotations.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then caveats, then an explicit Returns block. Dense but every clause carries operational value; the value-type and returns detail are earned. Slightly heavy in one run-on first sentence.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description supplies the full return shape inline ({object_path, set[], failed[], success}), plus the mutation safety profile and failure caveats. An agent has everything needed to call and interpret this 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 both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces the 'ONE object instance' scoping and editor-world resolution but adds little new semantics about the properties dict or object_path forms. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Batch-write several properties on ONE object instance in a single call') and explicitly contrasts the batched behavior against set_property_value's single-write semantics. An agent can distinguish this from sibling writers without opening the 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?

Gives clear context: editor-world only, one object per call, and directs the agent to get_properties/list_instance_overrides for verification before trusting results. It references the alternative set_property_value but does not crisply state 'use this instead of X when...'; no explicit when-not beyond the editor-world restriction.

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