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

Godot MCP Server Ultimate Edition

by Dex865378
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

set_project_setting

Modify a specific configuration value in the project.godot file by providing the section, key, and value.

Instructions

Set a value in the project.godot configuration file

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>",
      "section": "<section>",
      "key": "<key>",
      "value": "<value>"
    },
    "name": "set_project_setting"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectPathYes
sectionYesINI section (e.g. application, display, input)
keyYesSetting key (e.g. config/name, window/size/viewport_width)
valueYesValue to set

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden but only states action. Does not disclose whether settings are overwritten, validated, or persisted immediately. No behavioral traits beyond 'set a value'.

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?

Single sentence with no fluff, efficiently conveys core purpose. However, at 10 words it may be too terse to be fully useful.

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?

For a 4-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It omits return value, error handling, and any context about the configuration file format.

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?

Description adds no meaning beyond schema. Schema provides examples for section and key, but projectPath and value lack explanation. Tool description does not elaborate on parameter roles or syntax.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states it sets a value in the project.godot configuration file, specifying the exact resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools that set other aspects like main scene or project metadata.

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, nor prerequisites or context. Does not mention that the project must exist or that settings are typically read via get_project_settings.

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