Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Unity MCP Server

Unity MCP Server

by rachitkumarrastogi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

get_scene_referenced_assets

Lists asset paths referenced by a Unity scene with resolved GUIDs to help assess build size and impact.

Instructions

List asset paths referenced by a scene (GUIDs resolved). Helps build size and impact.

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": {
      "scene_path": "<scene_path>"
    },
    "name": "get_scene_referenced_assets"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
scene_pathYese.g. Assets/Scenes/Main.unity

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.5.2

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description bears the full disclosure burden. It reveals one behavioral detail (GUIDs are resolved to paths) but says nothing about whether direct or transitive dependencies are included, whether the scene must be open in the editor, or what form the returned list takes. Read-only nature is only implied by 'List'.

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?

Two short sentences with the core action front-loaded and no filler. The second sentence is thin but does contribute a purpose cue rather than repeating the name.

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?

For a one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers enough to attempt a call, but leaves open what the result contains (path list only vs. counts, direct vs. recursive references) — a gap that would be the first thing an agent needs when using it for impact analysis.

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 coverage is 100% and the single scene_path parameter is documented with an example path in the schema itself. The description adds no further meaning about path format, case sensitivity, or behavior when the scene is missing, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'List asset paths referenced by a scene', with the clarification that GUIDs are resolved into paths. An agent knows exactly what it retrieves, though nothing distinguishes it from adjacent scene tools like get_scene_summary or get_unused_assets_estimate.

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 clause 'Helps build size and impact' implies the usage context (build-size analysis rather than hierarchy inspection), but there is no explicit when-to-use, no exclusions, and no named alternative. Guidance is inferable rather than stated.

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