unreal-mcp-additional-tools

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

get_preset_property

Retrieve a property value from a Remote Control Preset by specifying the preset name and property name, enabling programmatic access to Unreal Engine settings.

Instructions

Get a property value exposed via a Remote Control Preset.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "preset_name": "<preset_name>",
      "property_name": "<property_name>"
    },
    "name": "get_preset_property"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`preset_name`	Yes	Preset name
`property_name`	Yes	Exposed property name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 21, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the action but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether the property is read-only, what happens if the property doesn't exist, or any side effects. For a getter, this is minimal but acceptable; however, it lacks detail on error behavior or return format.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the purpose. No wasted words, and it is appropriately sized for a simple getter tool.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema, no nested objects), the description is adequate but not rich. It doesn't mention what the return value looks like or any prerequisites, but for a basic getter with full schema coverage, it meets the minimum viable threshold.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, but the baseline is 3 given high coverage. It doesn't clarify the relationship between preset_name and property_name or any constraints.

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 clearly states the tool gets a property value from a Remote Control Preset, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like set_preset_property and call_preset_function, though it doesn't explicitly contrast them.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for reading exposed properties from a preset, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this vs. alternatives like get_preset_info or set_preset_property. Context is clear but exclusions are absent.

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

Deploy Server