Godot AI

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Node Manage

node_manage

Manage Godot scene node trees: delete, duplicate, rename, reorder, reparent nodes, and edit node groups, with optional scene-file guard to prevent mismatched edits.

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.

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 observedv2.9.1Jul 11, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly: it discloses that delete is undoable, scene root cannot be deleted or duplicated, rename has collision and character rules, reparent preserves children and forbids descendant moves, and the scene_file guard returns EDITED_SCENE_MISMATCH. This is strong behavioral detail for a mutation-heavy tool.

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 well organized with an intro, resource forms, per-operation bullets, a scene_file guard note, and call-shape guidance. It is dense but generally purposeful; however, the resource-form block overlaps with the get_children/get_groups operations and includes a 'properties' form not represented in the op list, creating minor redundancy and ambiguity.

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?

The description is nearly complete for a tool with this many operations: it covers each operation's semantics, constraints, the optional scene_file guard, and the canonical call envelope, while output schema covers return values. It lacks a concrete request example and does not clarify exactly how the resource forms relate to the op-based API, preventing a higher score.

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 effectively replaces the missing parameter docs by specifying every operation signature with arguments and defaults, e.g., duplicate(path, name='', scene_file='') and move(path, index, scene_file=''). It also documents the canonical {'op': ..., 'params': ...} call shape and the flat-parameter compatibility alias, giving an agent enough information to construct valid calls despite the permissive 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 identifies the resource as the node tree and enumerates a concrete set of verbs: delete, duplicate, rename, move, reparent, group management, and hierarchy reads. It is clear about the tool's scope but does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling node tools like node_create or node_set_property, so it stops short of a 5.

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 a 'prefer for active-session reads' note and per-operation constraints, but it does not say when to choose node_manage over alternatives such as node_find, scene_get_hierarchy, or node_set_property. Usage context must be inferred from the operation list rather than being explicitly stated.

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