Skip to main content
Glama
miracle1814

ue5-automation

by miracle1814
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

ue5_read_connections

Read Blueprint connection topology to identify pin-to-node and pin-to-pin links, enabling wiring verification before and after edits.

Instructions

Read the Blueprint's connection topology (which pin connects to which node/pin). Use to verify wiring before and after edits. | 读取蓝图连线拓扑。

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fieldsNoKeep only these fields | 只返回指定字段
bp_pathYesBlueprint asset path, e.g. /Game/BP_Test | 蓝图资产路径
graph_nameNoGraph name; omit to search all graphs | 图名，缺省=全图搜索

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv6.5.4
    • addedInput schema / properties / fields
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Keep only these fields | 只返回指定字段",
+  "type": "array"
+}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv3.2.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / bp_path / description
      Added value: +"Blueprint asset path, e.g. /Game/BP_Test | 蓝图资产路径"
    • addedInput schema / properties / graph_name / description
      Added value: +"Graph name; omit to search all graphs | 图名，缺省=全图搜索"
  3. First observedv3.2.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the burden. 'Read' implies a non-mutating operation and the topology subject tells the agent what data comes back conceptually, but there is no statement about scoping behavior when graph_name is omitted, response size on large graphs, or permissions. Adequate but with clear gaps for an unannotated 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 English portion is two tight, front-loaded sentences with no waste. The full bilingual duplication roughly doubles length without adding information for an English-reading agent, which keeps it from a 5.

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

Completeness3/5

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

With no annotations and no output schema, the description must stand in for return-value shape. Saying it returns connection topology is directionally useful, but the actual structure (source/dest pin and node identifiers, list nesting) and behavior on missing graphs or empty results are unstated, leaving an agent to discover the response shape by calling it.

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 description coverage is 100% and all three parameters are documented in the schema, including the 'omit to search all graphs' semantics for graph_name. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, 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?

The description names a specific verb and resource: reading the Blueprint's connection topology, explicitly clarified as 'which pin connects to which node/pin'. That distinguishes it cleanly from ue5_read_nodes (node inventory) and the write-side ue5_connect_pins/ue5_disconnect_pin siblings.

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?

'Use to verify wiring before and after edits' gives a clear usage context tied to a workflow moment rather than just restating the purpose. It stops short of naming alternatives or exclusions (e.g. preferring ue5_search_blueprint_nodes for locating a pin), so it is strong but not complete routing guidance.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools