Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Godot MCP Server Ultimate Edition

Godot MCP Server Ultimate Edition

by Dex865378
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

create_autoload

Register a script as an autoload or singleton by adding it to the project.godot configuration.

Instructions

Register a script as an autoload/singleton in project.godot

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "projectPath": "<projectPath>",
      "autoloadName": "<autoloadName>",
      "autoloadPath": "<autoloadPath>"
    },
    "name": "create_autoload"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectPathYes
autoloadNameYesName of the autoload (e.g. GameManager)
autoloadPathYesPath to the script (e.g. res://scripts/game_manager.gd)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must cover behavioral traits. It doesn't disclose what happens if autoload already exists, whether it overwrites, adds, or fails, nor any side effects on project.godot.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is a single sentence, very concise, but lacks necessary details for a tool with 3 parameters. It could add brief context without becoming verbose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the effect on project.godot or how the registration works.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema has 3 params (all required), with 67% description coverage. The description adds no extra meaning beyond schema; e.g., 'projectPath' is not explained.

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 description clearly states the action 'register a script' and the resource 'as an autoload/singleton in project.godot'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like attach_script_to_node or create_script.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. For example, it doesn't mention that autoloads are project-wide singletons, unlike attach_script_to_node which attaches to scene nodes.

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