Skip to main content
Glama

update_ism_instance_transform

Destructive

Update a single instanced static mesh instance's transform by index, moving, rotating, or scaling it in place. Avoid removing and re-adding to keep the instance index stable.

Instructions

Move, rotate or rescale ONE existing instance of an InstancedStaticMeshComponent in place, by index -- cheaper than remove + re-add and it keeps the index stable. Leave mark_render_state_dirty at its default true or the viewport keeps drawing the old transform.

Returns: { updated: bool, num_instances: int }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
scaleNoOptional [x, y, z]
locationNo[x, y, z] new translation
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]
teleportNoOptional; default false
actor_nameYesDisplay label or internal name of the actor carrying the ISM component (required)
world_spaceNoOptional; defaults true
component_nameNoOptional ISM component name
instance_indexYesIndex of the instance to update (required, >=0)
mark_render_state_dirtyNoOptional; default true (engine signature bMarkRenderStateDirty=true)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare the mutation/destructive profile, and the description adds non-obvious behavioral detail: it mutates only a single instance, preserving its index, and that mark_render_state_dirty must stay true or the viewport renders a stale transform. That render-state caveat is genuinely useful context beyond the annotations, though it doesn't discuss failure modes or permissions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loads the core action, then the efficiency rationale and index-stability benefit, then the critical gotcha, then the return shape. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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 supplies the return shape ({ updated, num_instances }), covers the single-instance/index-stability semantics, and warns about the render-state requirement. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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 real meaning for mark_render_state_dirty (default true and why) and clarifies the index targets a single instance. It doesn't elaborate on the rotation object-vs-array distinction, which the schema already handles well.

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 precise verb set (move/rotate/rescale) on a specific resource (one existing ISM instance) with an explicit scope constraint ('ONE', 'by index'). It also distinguishes itself from the remove_ism_instance + add_ism_instance workflow by calling out that it is cheaper and preserves the index.

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 when-to-use context: prefer this over remove + re-add because it keeps the index stable, and it warns to leave mark_render_state_dirty at default. It stops short of naming the sibling tools explicitly or stating when-not to use it, so it is strong context rather than full when/when-not/alternatives guidance.

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