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

Godot MCP Server Ultimate Edition

by Dex865378
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

create_input_action

Adds a new input action to the Godot project's input map, binding specified keys (e.g., "A", "Left") for actions like move_left or jump.

Instructions

Add an input action to the project.godot input map

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>",
      "actionName": "<actionName>",
      "keys": "<keys>"
    },
    "name": "create_input_action"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectPathYes
actionNameYesName of the input action (e.g. move_left, jump)
keysYesKey names to bind (e.g. ["A", "Left"])

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'Add an input action' without mentioning side effects (e.g., overwriting existing actions), permissions needed, or error cases. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 with no redundancy, but it is too brief to adequately describe the tool's purpose and parameters for a three-parameter tool.

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

Completeness1/5

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

No output schema, no annotations, and minimal description. Important details like return values, success/error handling, and constraints are missing, making it inadequate for an agent to use correctly.

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 covers 67% of parameters with descriptions, but the description adds no value beyond the schema. The 'projectPath' parameter remains unexplained, and the description does not clarify expected input format or constraints.

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 tool adds an input action to the Godot input map, using a specific verb ('Add') and resource ('input action to the project.godot input map'), which distinguishes it from sibling creation tools.

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 versus other creation tools like 'create_project' or 'create_scene'. It does not specify prerequisites or context for usage.

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