Skip to main content
Glama

spawn_pcg_volume

Creates an APCGVolume actor in the editor world with a real cube brush from a specified extent and optionally assigns a PCG graph, ensuring correct bounds for instance generation.

Instructions

Spawns an APCGVolume in the editor world with a REAL cube brush (from extent), optionally assigning a graph. Bounds, origin, scale and brush geometry are RE-READ from the spawned actor, never echoed. Without extent the volume is spawned brush-less (kept for compatibility) and the response says so explicitly, because a PCG component with null bounds generates 0 instances in total silence.

Returns: { actor_name: string, actor_label: string, actor_class: string, has_pcg_component: bool, pcg_graph_path: string, graph_assigned: bool, location: [float], bounds_extent_actual: [float], bounds_origin_actual: [float], actor_scale: [float], has_brush_geometry: bool, brush_poly_count: int, brush_requested: bool, scale_normalized: bool, warning?: string, requested: {...} }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoOptional explicit name (skipped if already used in the current level to avoid Rename-onto-occupied crash).
extentNoCube HALF-size [x, y, z] in unreal units, each > 0 (same convention as spawn_box_volume / spawn_navmesh_bounds_volume). STRONGLY RECOMMENDED: omitting it leaves the volume with extent (0,0,0) and the PCG component generates 0 instances with no error and no warning.
locationNoWorld location [X, Y, Z] for the volume.
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 for the volume (default 0,0,0).
pcg_graph_pathNoOptional content path of a UPCGGraph to assign to the spawned volume's PCG component.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 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 already declare the write/idempotency/safety profile, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: bounds/scale/brush geometry are RE-READ from the spawned actor rather than echoed, the brush-less fallback triggers a silent 0-instance failure, and the response reports that condition via a warning field. This is exactly the kind of failure-mode disclosure an agent needs before calling.

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 the re-read guarantee, and every sentence carries weight, including the compatibility caveat. The inline Returns block is verbose but justified because no output schema exists to carry that information; it could be trimmed slightly.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating the return shape (actor name/label/class, has_pcg_component, graph path, actual bounds, brush diagnostics, warning). Combined with the behavioral caveats, an agent has everything needed to call it and interpret the result.

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 reinforces the semantics that matter most: ``extent`` is a cube HALF-size whose omission silently yields zero PCG instances, and the name collision behavior is noted. It adds meaningful consequence-level context rather than restating schema types.

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 ("Spawns an APCGVolume in the editor world") and narrows scope with distinguishing details ("with a REAL cube brush (from extent), optionally assigning a graph"). An agent can separate this from generic spawners like spawn_actor or spawn_box_volume without opening a 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 conditional guidance: supply ``extent`` for a real brush, omit it only for backward compatibility, and warns the brush-less path produces silent zero instances. It does not explicitly name when to prefer a sibling (e.g. add_pcg_component or create_pcg_graph) nor state exclusions, 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