Skip to main content
Glama

setup_foot_ik

DestructiveIdempotent

Add a Leg IK node to an Animation Blueprint's AnimGraph and bind left and right foot bones for foot IK setup. Saves the blueprint without compiling; wire the node afterward.

Instructions

Add a Leg IK node (UAnimGraphNode_LegIK) to the top-level AnimGraph of an Animation Blueprint, or reuse the first one already there, bind the feet into its LegsDefinition, then mark the blueprint structurally modified and save it without compiling. Leg 0 gets left_foot_bone and leg 1 right_foot_bone as the FK foot bone; a leg's IK target bone is set to the same bone when it is unset or the leg's foot changes, so the node compiles but has no effect until each IK target names an IK bone (set_anim_graph_node_property on LegsDefinition with the returned node_id); legs beyond the first two and the other leg settings are kept. Bones the target skeleton lacks are an error and nothing is written. The node is left unwired: connect it with connect_anim_graph_pins. Idempotent; refused while PIE runs unless force=true.

Returns: { anim_blueprint_path, node_id, left_foot_bone, right_foot_bone, legs: [{ fk_foot_bone, ik_foot_bone, num_bones_in_limb }], bones_checked_against, ik_node_count, already_existed, 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.
blueprint_nameNoAlias of `anim_blueprint_path` (same value, same meaning). Accepted because sibling tools spell this parameter differently; prefer `anim_blueprint_path`.
left_foot_boneYesLeft foot bone, written as the FK foot bone of leg 0; checked against the target skeleton when the blueprint has one.
right_foot_boneYesRight foot bone, written as the FK foot bone of leg 1; checked against the target skeleton when the blueprint has one.
anim_blueprint_pathNoPath to the UAnimBlueprint asset.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.2.2
    • changedInput schema / properties / left_foot_bone / description
      Previous value: -"Name of the left foot bone; required and echoed back, but not written to the node and not checked against the skeleton."New value: +"Left foot bone, written as the FK foot bone of leg 0; checked against the target skeleton when the blueprint has one."
    • changedInput schema / properties / right_foot_bone / description
      Previous value: -"Name of the right foot bone; required and echoed back, but not written to the node and not checked against the skeleton."New value: +"Right foot bone, written as the FK foot bone of leg 1; checked against the target skeleton when the blueprint has one."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.2.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / left_foot_bone / description
      Previous value: -"Name of the left foot bone in the skeleton."New value: +"Name of the left foot bone; required and echoed back, but not written to the node and not checked against the skeleton."
    • changedInput schema / properties / right_foot_bone / description
      Previous value: -"Name of the right foot bone in the skeleton."New value: +"Name of the right foot bone; required and echoed back, but not written to the node and not checked against the skeleton."
  3. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations give the safety profile (destructive=true, idempotent=true), and the description adds substantial behavior beyond it: nothing is written if bones are missing, legs beyond the first two and other leg settings are preserved, the node is left unwired, and it is refused during PIE (with the reason). This is exactly the extra context annotations cannot express.

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, and every sentence carries real information (idempotency, PIE refusal, error behavior, returns). It is dense and long, bordering on a wall of text, which keeps it from a full 5.

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 complex mutation tool with no output schema, the description enumerates the return fields, the error/no-write condition, the PIE gate, and the required follow-up calls, so an agent has everything needed to call and interpret it.

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; the description still adds meaning by mapping left_foot_bone/right_foot_bone to leg 0/leg 1 FK bones, explaining the IK-target auto-set rule, and clarifying the PIE refusal that force overrides. It goes modestly beyond the schema's own descriptions.

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?

The first sentence names a specific verb (Add) and resource (UAnimGraphNode_LegIK to the top-level AnimGraph of an Animation Blueprint) and even states the reuse behavior. It is unmistakable against siblings like add_anim_graph_node or add_ik_goal because it scopes itself to Leg IK binding of feet.

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?

It clearly states the context and follow-ups: the node is left unwired and must be connected with connect_anim_graph_pins, the IK target must be set via set_anim_graph_node_property, and it is refused under PIE unless force=true. It does not explicitly contrast itself against sibling node-creation tools, so it falls just short of a 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