Skip to main content
Glama

Start the Modding Kit editor

editor_launch

Start the Bannerlord Modding Kit with your modules and the editor bridge, optionally entering the scene editor, while automatically dismissing common loading warnings.

Instructions

Starts the Modding Kit build (bin/Win64_Shipping_wEditor/Bannerlord.exe) with the official singleplayer modules, the given modules and the editor bridge, and (open_editor=true) enters the scene editor automatically (with an empty scene; open yours in the editor). Loading usually takes 1–5 minutes; poll editor_status until it reports 'edit mode ON'. While it loads, 'RGL WARNING' message boxes about other mods' SubModule.xml entries (common with Workshop mods made for launcher extensions) are answered automatically with OK, together with the two prompts that follow each of them (the crash watchdog's 'collect necessary files?' → No, nothing is collected or uploaded; 'Always Ignore?' → Cancel, no setting changes) and the shader-cache notices ('Mod change detected').

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
forceNoStart even if a Bannerlord process is already running.
modulesNoYour module ids to load (with their dependencies), e.g. ["MyMod"].
open_editorNoEnter the scene editor automatically (default true; needs the bridge).
decline_safe_modeNoIf the game asks to start in Safe Mode after a crash, answer No (keeps your modules and the bridge loaded). Default false: the question is left to you.
ignore_asset_problemsNoStart even when your modules' packages contain meshes without a material (the editor then stalls on a crash-watchdog dump for each while loading).
dismiss_module_warningsNoDuring the first 10 minutes press OK on module-metadata warnings, No/Cancel on the 'collect files?' and 'Always Ignore?' prompts that follow each of them, and OK on shader-cache notices (default true). Other message boxes are left for you; editor_status lists them.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only mark it as non-read-only and non-destructive; the description goes far beyond that, disclosing the 1-5 minute load time, every message box that gets auto-dismissed, and the reassuring fact that no files are collected/uploaded and no settings are changed. This is exactly the side-effect detail an agent needs before triggering a long, window-driving launch.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded and the long sentence is dense with non-redundant operational detail. It loses a point because the enumerations of which prompt gets which answer largely restate the dismiss_module_warnings schema text, making the description longer than strictly necessary.

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?

With no output schema and six optional parameters, the description supplies the timing, the polling target, and the automation side effects an agent needs. Minor gaps remain around failure/timeout handling, but nothing essential for a correct invocation is missing.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all six parameters including the prompt-handling behavior of dismiss_module_warnings. The description adds only marginal value (e.g., the editor opens with an empty scene), so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a concrete verb and resource ('Starts the Modding Kit build .../Bannerlord.exe') with the exact module set it loads, which cleanly separates it from siblings like editor_play, editor_bridge_install, and editor_status. An agent can identify the action without opening the schema.

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?

Gives the operational workflow explicitly: launch, then 'poll editor_status until it reports edit mode ON', and notes when open_editor takes effect. It does not state when NOT to use this versus editor_play or a bridge install, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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