Skip to main content
Glama
wgt19861219

Godot MCP Enhanced

by wgt19861219
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

runtime

Manage Godot project execution by launching the editor, running or stopping projects, fetching debug output, running tests, and retrieving the Godot version.

Instructions

启动编辑器、运行/停止项目、获取调试输出、运行测试、获取 Godot 版本。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
speedNo录制：回放速度倍率（默认 1.0）
actionYes操作类型
timeoutNo自动停止秒数（默认 30。游戏冷启动 >30s 的项目传更大值如 120；wait_for_bridge 时自动取 max(bridge_timeout+10, timeout) 防与 bridge 就绪 race）
file_nameNo录制保存:始终自动命名 recording_YYYYMMDD_HHmmss.json(file_name 入参被忽略);但 file_name 须匹配 recording_*.json 格式(否则 INVALID_FILE_NAME),禁止含 / \\ ..
profilingNotrue 时 spawn 前绑 debugger 端口并传 --remote-debug(函数级 profiling 前置;之后用 profiler 工具 action=capture_functions 采样;仅 spawn 模式,attach/已运行会话无 debugger 通道)
quit_flagNorun_tests 的 GUT 退出标志。默认 gquit(GUT ≤9.5);GUT 9.6+ 移除 -gquit(报 Unknown arguments: -gquit)时切 gexitgquit
godot_pathNo覆盖 Godot 二进制路径（可选，优先于项目配置和环境变量）
events_jsonNo录制：JSON 格式的事件序列字符串
test_scriptNo测试脚本或目录路径（默认 res://test/）res://test/
project_pathNoGodot 项目目录路径（可选，默认使用 GODOT_PROJECT_PATH 环境变量或当前目录）
bridge_timeoutNowait_for_bridge 轮询总预算(秒,默认 10)
load_autoloadsNo是否加载 Autoload 上下文（默认 true）
wait_for_bridgeNotrue 时 spawn 后轮询 bridge 就绪(默认 false,向后兼容)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.33.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / profiling
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "true 时 spawn 前绑 debugger 端口并传 --remote-debug(函数级 profiling 前置;之后用 profiler 工具 action=capture_functions 采样;仅 spawn 模式,attach/已运行会话无 debugger 通道)",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.32.11
    • addedInput schema / properties / quit_flag
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "gquit",
+  "description": "run_tests 的 GUT 退出标志。默认 gquit(GUT ≤9.5);GUT 9.6+ 移除 -gquit(报 Unknown arguments: -gquit)时切 gexit",
+  "enum": [
+    "gquit",
+    "gexit"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / timeout / description
      Previous value: -"自动停止秒数（默认 30）"New value: +"自动停止秒数（默认 30。游戏冷启动 >30s 的项目传更大值如 120；wait_for_bridge 时自动取 max(bridge_timeout+10, timeout) 防与 bridge 就绪 race）"
  3. First observedv0.25.7

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The annotations provide no safety profile (all false), so the description carries the burden of disclosure. It fails to mention side effects such as spawning or stopping processes, recording data, or requiring specific permissions. The action names imply state changes, but the description does not elaborate on consequences.

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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the core runtime operations. It is efficient and avoids fluff, but it omits several schema actions (e.g., recording operations), making it somewhat incomplete rather than deliberately concise.

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 tool with 13 parameters, 11 action types, and no output schema, this description is too sparse. It doesn't cover recording, profiling, or test-specific behavior, leaving agents to rely entirely on the schema. The description doesn't provide a high-level mental model for when to use different actions.

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?

The schema descriptions cover all parameters (100%), including detailed notes on timeout, quit_flag, file_name, and wait_for_bridge. The tool description adds no parameter-level meaning and doesn't even mention the action parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already explains parameters well.

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 states a clear set of verb-resource pairs (launch editor, run/stop project, get debug output, run tests, get Godot version), which immediately conveys the tool's scope. However, it omits several actions present in the schema (e.g., record_start, record_stop, profiler-related actions) and doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like 'project' or 'game'.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when to avoid it. The description is only a capability list with no context about conditions, prerequisites, or trade-offs between sibling tools.

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