Skip to main content
Glama
playcanvas

PlayCanvas Editor MCP Server

Official
by playcanvas

remove_components

Delete specific components from an entity in the PlayCanvas Editor MCP Server, streamlining entity management for real-time 3D web applications.

Instructions

Remove components from an entity

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
componentsYesArray of component names to remove from the entity.
idYesAn entity ID.

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function that executes the tool logic by calling wss.call to remove the specified components from the entity.
    ({ id, components }) => {
        return wss.call('entities:components:remove', id, components);
  • Input schema validation using Zod for the tool parameters: entity ID and non-empty array of component names.
    {
        id: EntityIdSchema,
        components: z.array(ComponentNameSchema).nonempty().describe('Array of component names to remove from the entity.')
  • Registration of the 'remove_components' tool with the MCP server, including name, description, input schema, and handler.
    mcp.tool(
        'remove_components',
        'Remove components from an entity',
        {
            id: EntityIdSchema,
            components: z.array(ComponentNameSchema).nonempty().describe('Array of component names to remove from the entity.')
        },
        ({ id, components }) => {
            return wss.call('entities:components:remove', id, components);
        }
    );
  • Zod enum schema defining valid component names, used in the remove_components tool input schema.
    export const ComponentNameSchema = z.enum([
        'anim',
        'animation',
        'audiolistener',
        'button',
        'camera',
        'collision',
        'element',
        'layoutchild',
        'layoutgroup',
        'light',
        'model',
        'particlesystem',
        'render',
        'rigidbody',
        'screen',
        'script',
        'scrollbar',
        'scrollview',
        'sound',
        'sprite'
    ]);
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It implies a destructive mutation ('remove') but doesn't disclose permissions needed, reversibility, side effects, or error handling. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for the tool's complexity, making it easy to parse without unnecessary elaboration.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a destructive mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks crucial context like what happens after removal, success/failure indicators, or how it interacts with sibling tools. The high schema coverage doesn't compensate for missing behavioral and usage details.

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 fully documents both parameters (id and components). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what's in the schema, such as explaining component relationships or removal constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does all the work.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Remove components from an entity' clearly states the action (remove) and target (components from an entity), but it's vague about scope and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_entities' or 'modify_entities'. It specifies the resource type (components) but lacks details about what removal entails.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions, and it fails to reference sibling tools like 'add_components' for complementary operations or 'delete_entities' for broader deletions.

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

Related 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/playcanvas/editor-mcp-server'

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