Skip to main content
Glama
Flux-Point-Studios

Unreal Engine MCP Server

build_environment

Destructive

Build Unreal Engine environments by sculpting landscapes, painting foliage, and generating procedural terrain and biomes.

Instructions

Create/sculpt landscapes, paint foliage, and generate procedural terrain/biomes.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hourNo
maxXNo
maxYNo
minXNo
minYNo
nameNoName identifier.
pathNoPath to a directory.
seedNo
timeNo
toolNo
countNo
namesNo
scaleNo3D scale (x, y, z).
sizeXNo
sizeYNo
actionYesAction
assetsNo
boundsNo
radiusNo
densityNo
falloffNo
numLODsNo
qualityNo
spacingNo
filenameNo
locationNo3D location (x, y, z).
materialNoMaterial asset path.
maxScaleNo
meshPathNoMesh asset path.
minScaleNo
positionNo3D location (x, y, z).
rotationNo3D rotation (pitch, yaw, roll).
settingsNo
strengthNo
tileSizeNo
actorNameNoName of the actor.
brushSizeNo
eraseModeNo
intensityNo
layerNameNo
locationsNo
randomYawNo
timeoutMsNo
assetPathsNo
dataLayersNo
heightDataNo
staticMeshNoMesh asset path.
transformsNo
volumeNameNo
foliageTypeNo
heightScaleNo
runtimeGridNo
sectionSizeNo
cullDistanceNo
foliageTypesNo
materialPathNoMaterial asset path.
subdivisionsNo
alignToNormalNo
landscapeNameNo
updateNormalsNo
componentCountNo2D vector.
foliageTypePathNoAsset path (e.g., /Game/Path/Asset).
quadsPerSectionNo
isSpatiallyLoadedNo
enableWorldPartitionNo
sectionsPerComponentNo
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds no further behavioral context. It fails to disclose that actions like 'delete' or 'bake_lightmap' are destructive, or that modifying landscapes can overwrite existing work. With annotations present, the description should supplement, but it offers no added detail.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is a single sentence, which is concise, but it is under-specification for a tool with 66 parameters and over 20 distinct actions. It provides no structured breakdown or feature list, making it too terse to be useful.

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?

The tool has a very broad scope, but the description only covers landscapes, foliage, and terrain. It omits entire categories like sky, fog, LODs, snapshots, and time-of-day actions, leaving the agent with an incomplete picture. With no output schema, the description should at least summarize the main capability groups, but it does not.

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

Parameters1/5

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

With 66 parameters and only 21% schema description coverage, the description carries a heavy burden to explain parameter usage. It does not mention the required 'action' parameter, nor any parameter names or how they map to operations, so it completely fails to compensate for the sparse schema.

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?

The description uses specific verbs (create, sculpt, paint, generate) and resources (landscapes, foliage, terrain/biomes), making the tool's purpose reasonably clear. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools or hint at the full range of actions (e.g., sky, fog, LODs, snapshots) available via the 'action' parameter.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or exclusions. Sibling tools like manage_geometry and manage_lighting are not mentioned, and no context is given about prerequisites or typical scenarios.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Flux-Point-Studios/unreal-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server