Skip to main content
Glama

add_select_node

Add a Select node to a Blueprint to choose a value by index, replacing multiple Branch nodes for cleaner multi-way selection. Specify index type, option type, and number of options.

Instructions

Add a Select node to choose a value based on an index.

From Ch. 15: The Select node returns the value matching the index input. It's a cleaner alternative to chains of Branch nodes for multi-way selection.

Index type can be: Integer, Enum, Boolean, or Byte. Option type can be any type (Actor Class Reference, String, Float, etc.)

Example from the book: Based on DifficultyLevel enum (Easy/Normal/Hard), select which Boss Blueprint class to spawn.

Args: blueprint_name: Blueprint to add the node to index_type: Type for the Index input ("Integer", "Enum", "Boolean", "Byte") option_type: Type for the Option inputs and Return Value num_options: Number of option pins to create node_position: [X, Y] graph position

KB: see knowledge_base/01_BLUEPRINT_FUNDAMENTALS.md#overview Example: add_select_node(blueprint_name="/Game/MCP_Test/BP_Example")

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
index_typeNoInteger
num_optionsNo
option_typeNoString
node_positionNo
blueprint_nameYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It explains the node's runtime behavior (returns the value matching the index input), allowed index types, and option-type flexibility. It does not explicitly mention graph mutation side effects or compile/save behavior, but 'Add' and the node semantics convey the main operational intent.

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 description is front-loaded with purpose and then uses a compact Args block plus an example call. The book reference and illustrative example add context that clarifies the node's role without making the description bloated.

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?

For a 5-parameter mutation tool with no annotations, the description covers purpose, usage, parameter semantics, and provides an example invocation. An output schema exists, so return-value details are not required, and the schema handles required-versus-optional distinctions.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description fully compensates by explaining all five parameters: target blueprint, index type with allowed values, option type, number of option pins, and node position format [X, Y]. This adds substantial meaning beyond the bare 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?

The opening sentence names a specific operation (adding a Select node) and its function (choosing a value based on an index). It also contrasts the tool with chains of Branch nodes, which helps distinguish it from the many add_*_node siblings.

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?

The description explicitly positions the tool as a cleaner alternative to chains of Branch nodes for multi-way selection, which gives clear when-to-use guidance. It does not enumerate exclusions or alternative node families like switch nodes, but the core usage context is present.

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