Skip to main content
Glama

capture_state

Capture a snapshot of the current game state from a running Godot project to analyze or debug specific nodes and components.

Instructions

Capture a snapshot of the game state from the running project. Optionally specify a node path to narrow the capture.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nodePathNoNode path to capture state from (e.g. 'Player', 'UI/HealthBar')

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the capture_state tool. It uses the plugin client to send the captureState command.
      handler: async (ctx) => {
        const { nodePath } = ctx.args;
        const client = requirePlugin(getPluginClient());
        const params: Record<string, unknown> = {};
        if (nodePath) params.node_path = nodePath;
        const result = await client.sendCommand(PLUGIN_COMMANDS.captureState, params);
        return makeTextResponse({ data: result });
      },
    },
  • Registration of the capture_state tool in the createRuntimeTools function.
      name: "capture_state",
      description:
        "Capture a snapshot of the game state from the running project. Optionally specify a node path to narrow the capture.",
      schema: {
        nodePath: z
          .string()
          .optional()
          .describe("Node path to capture state from (e.g. 'Player', 'UI/HealthBar')"),
      },
      handler: async (ctx) => {
        const { nodePath } = ctx.args;
        const client = requirePlugin(getPluginClient());
        const params: Record<string, unknown> = {};
        if (nodePath) params.node_path = nodePath;
        const result = await client.sendCommand(PLUGIN_COMMANDS.captureState, params);
        return makeTextResponse({ data: result });
      },
    },
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions capturing a snapshot and an optional node path, but does not cover critical aspects such as whether this requires the project to be running, what permissions are needed, if it's read-only or has side effects, rate limits, or the format of the returned state. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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 concise and front-loaded, consisting of two sentences that directly state the tool's purpose and parameter usage. There is no wasted language, and it efficiently communicates the essential information without unnecessary details.

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?

Given the complexity of capturing game state, lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what the snapshot includes, how it's formatted, or any dependencies (e.g., project must be running). For a tool that likely returns structured data, more context is needed to guide the agent effectively.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with the single parameter 'nodePath' documented as 'Node path to capture state from (e.g., 'Player', 'UI/HealthBar')'. The description adds minimal value beyond this, only noting it's optional to narrow the capture. Since schema coverage is high, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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's purpose: 'Capture a snapshot of the game state from the running project.' It specifies the verb ('capture') and resource ('game state'), but does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling tools like 'get_runtime_state' or 'get_live_scene_tree', which might offer similar functionality. This makes it clear but not fully distinguished from alternatives.

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?

The description provides minimal guidance: it mentions an optional parameter to narrow the capture, but does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_runtime_state' or 'get_live_scene_tree'. No context, exclusions, or prerequisites are provided, leaving the agent with little direction on appropriate usage scenarios.

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

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/woohq/godette-mcp'

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