Skip to main content
Glama

game_manage

Inspect runtime game scenes and nodes, and simulate keyboard, mouse, and gamepad inputs for automated testing.

Instructions

Runtime game inspection and input simulation.

These ops target the running game process through Godot's EngineDebugger bridge. Start the project first with project_run and poll editor_state until game_capture_ready=true.

Ops:

  • get_scene_tree(depth=10, root_path="") Inspect the running scene tree. root_path accepts an absolute runtime path or a scene-relative path rooted at the current scene.

  • get_node_info(path, include_properties=True) Inspect one running node's metadata and optional property snapshot.

  • get_ui_elements(root_path="", include_hidden=False, include_disabled=True, max_depth=10) Inspect visible runtime Control nodes for UI testing. Includes path, type, text where present, disabled state, and rect metadata.

  • input_key(key, pressed=True, echo=False) Send a key press/release to the running game.

  • input_mouse(event, position=None, button="left", pressed=True) Send a mouse motion or button event. event: "motion" | "button". position is a {x, y} object or [x, y] array; omit it to use the game's current cursor position. A present but malformed position is rejected rather than silently falling back to the cursor.

  • input_gamepad(device=0, control="button", index=0, pressed=True, value=0.0) Send a joypad button or axis event. control: "button" | "axis".

  • input_action(action, pressed=True, strength=1.0) Set a project action's pressed state directly in the running game.

  • input_state(actions=None) Read current action pressed states. Empty actions = all project actions.

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
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
opYes
paramsNo
session_idNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the bridge mechanism (EngineDebugger), prerequisites, and specific behaviors (e.g., input_mouse malformed position rejection). It could be more explicit about side effects (e.g., whether input simulation is temporary or modifies state), but overall transparent for common use.

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?

The description is long (15+ lines) but well-structured: summary, prerequisites, bulleted ops. It front-loads purpose and organizes details logically. Could be slightly more concise, but the density of information justifies the length.

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?

Given 8 ops, complex parameters, and no annotations, the description is comprehensive. It covers prerequisites, each op's parameters, canonical call shape, and behavioral notes. Since an output schema exists (not shown), return values need not be explained. The description fully enables correct tool usage.

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%, but the description fully documents each op's parameters with types, defaults, and behavior (e.g., position formats, rejection of malformed). This adds immense value beyond the sparse input schema, effectively compensating for missing schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states 'Runtime game inspection and input simulation,' specifying the tool's verb (inspect/simulate) and resource (running game process). It also lists specific ops covering inspection and simulation, distinguishing it from sibling tools like node_manage or filesystem_manage which target different aspects.

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?

Description provides explicit prerequisite: 'Start the project first with project_run and poll editor_state until game_capture_ready=true.' However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over siblings or when not to use it. The purpose is clear enough to infer usage, but lacks direct exclusions.

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/hi-godot/godot-ai'

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