godot-omni

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

node_manage

Structure Godot scene nodes by renaming, reordering, reparenting, deleting, duplicating, adjusting transforms, and managing groups.

Instructions

Node tree manipulation (delete, duplicate, rename, reorder, reparent, groups, hierarchy reads).

Resource forms (prefer for active-session reads): godot://node/{path}/properties, godot://node/{path}/children, godot://node/{path}/groups

Ops: • get_children(path) Direct children of a node (name, type, path each). • get_groups(path) Group names the node belongs to. • delete(path, scene_file="") Remove the node. Cannot delete scene root. Undoable. • duplicate(path, name="", scene_file="") Deep-copy a node + children as a sibling. Cannot duplicate scene root. • rename(path, new_name, scene_file="") Rename a node. Sibling-name collision and "/" / ":" / "@" rules apply. • move(path, index, scene_file="") Reorder among siblings. Index 0 = first. • reparent(path, new_parent, scene_file="") Move under a new parent. Children preserved. Cannot move into descendants. • add_to_group(path, group, scene_file="") Add the node to a group. • remove_from_group(path, group, scene_file="") Remove the node from a group. • rotate(path, degrees, axis="y", relative=false, scene_file="") Rotate a 2D or 3D node by degrees. Undoable. • scale(path, scale, relative=false, scene_file="") Scale a 2D or 3D node or Control. Undoable. • translate(path, offset, relative=true, scene_file="") Move / offset a node position. Undoable.

All write ops accept the optional scene_file guard — if non-empty, the mutation fails with EDITED_SCENE_MISMATCH when the editor's current scene doesn't match.

Canonical call shape: {"op": "<verb>", "params": {...}}. Flat op parameters are accepted as a compatibility alias when the client transmits them; op and session_id remain top-level.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`op`	Yes
`params`	No
`session_id`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv4.1.0Sep 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly. It discloses undoability for delete/rotate/scale/translate, restrictions like 'Cannot delete scene root' and 'Cannot move into descendants', naming collision rules, and the EDITED_SCENE_MISMATCH guard behavior for scene_file.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is dense but well-structured: a one-line summary, a compact resource-forms section, a bulleted operation list with one line per op, and a short call-shape note. Each sentence adds operational value, and the content is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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

Completeness5/5

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

This is a complex 12-operation tool with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage, yet the description covers each operation's parameters, key restrictions, undoability, error guard, and invocation shape. An output schema exists, so return-value details are not required from the description.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does. Every operation lists its parameters with defaults and semantics: e.g., 'move(path, index, scene_file="") — Reorder among siblings. Index 0 = first.' It also explains the canonical call shape and the flat-parameter compatibility alias.

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 opens with a clear summary: 'Node tree manipulation (delete, duplicate, rename, reorder, reparent, groups, hierarchy reads).' The verb-plus-resource framing and the enumerated operations make the tool's purpose unambiguous and distinguish it from siblings like node_get_properties, node_create, and node_set_property.

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?

The description provides clear context for when to use the tool: it covers node tree mutations and hierarchy reads, and it notes 'Resource forms (prefer for active-session reads)' and the optional scene_file guard for write ops. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool versus overlapping siblings such as node_get_properties or scene_get_hierarchy.

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