feat(manage_gameobject): add is_static parameter to modify action#1005
Merged
Scriptwonder merged 3 commits intoCoplayDev:betafrom Apr 1, 2026
Merged
Conversation
manage_gameobject already serializes isStatic in read output (GameObjectSerializer, GameObjectResource) but the modify action had no parameter to write it. This adds is_static (bool) across all three layers: - C#: GameObjectModify.cs calls GameObjectUtility.SetStaticEditorFlags() - Python MCP tool: manage_gameobject.py with coerce_bool normalization - Python CLI: gameobject.py with --static/--no-static flag When true, all static flags are set; when false, all are cleared. Omitting the parameter is a no-op (fully backwards compatible). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Tests cover: is_static=True, is_static=False, string coercion
("true" → True), and omission (isStatic excluded from params).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Contributor
Reviewer's GuideAdds an Sequence diagram for manage_gameobject modify with is_static propagationsequenceDiagram
actor AIClient
participant ManageGameobjectTool as ManageGameobjectTool_Python
participant UnityMCP as UnityMCP_Server
participant GameObjectModify as GameObjectModify_CSharp
AIClient->>ManageGameobjectTool: manage_gameobject(action=modify, target, is_static)
ManageGameobjectTool->>ManageGameobjectTool: coerce_bool(is_static)
ManageGameobjectTool->>UnityMCP: POST manage_gameobject params including isStatic
UnityMCP->>GameObjectModify: Handle(params)
GameObjectModify->>GameObjectModify: read isStatic from params
GameObjectModify->>GameObjectModify: SetStaticEditorFlags(targetGo, flags)
GameObjectModify-->>UnityMCP: modified GameObject
UnityMCP-->>ManageGameobjectTool: response
ManageGameobjectTool-->>AIClient: updated GameObject data including isStatic
Class diagram for manage_gameobject and GameObjectModify is_static handlingclassDiagram
class GameObjectCLICommand {
+modify(target str, search_method str, tag str, layer str, active bool, static bool, add_components str, remove_components str)
}
class ManageGameobjectTool {
+manage_gameobject(action str, target str, search_method str, prefab_name str, prefab_folder str, save_as_prefab bool, set_active bool, layer str, is_static bool, components_to_remove list~str~, component_properties dict~str, dict~str, any~~, world_space bool, position any, rotation any, scale any)
-coerce_bool(value any, default bool)
}
class GameObjectModify {
+Handle(params JObject, targetToken JToken, searchMethod string) object
-ApplyLayer(targetGo GameObject, layer string)
-ApplyActive(targetGo GameObject, setActive bool)
-ApplyStatic(targetGo GameObject, isStatic bool)
}
GameObjectCLICommand --> ManageGameobjectTool : builds params
ManageGameobjectTool --> GameObjectModify : passes isStatic in params
GameObjectModify ..> GameObject : modifies isStatic and StaticEditorFlags
GameObjectModify ..> StaticEditorFlags : uses for SetStaticEditorFlags
GameObjectModify ..> GameObjectUtility : calls SetStaticEditorFlags
File-Level Changes
Tips and commandsInteracting with Sourcery
Customizing Your ExperienceAccess your dashboard to:
Getting Help
|
Contributor
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (2)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughAdds optional static-flag support end-to-end: a CLI Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant CLI
participant Service
participant Unity
CLI->>Service: modify command with params (including isStatic)
Service->>Service: coerce is_static -> boolean or remove if None
Service->>Unity: send command params (action, target, isStatic?)
Unity->>Unity: GameObjectModify.Handle parses params
Unity->>Unity: compute desired StaticEditorFlags
Unity->>Unity: if changed -> SetStaticEditorFlags(target, desiredFlags)
Unity-->>Service: response (success/data)
Service-->>CLI: return result
Estimated code review effort🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~20 minutes Poem
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 2 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
![sourcery-ai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/48477?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey - I've found 1 issue
Prompt for AI Agents
Please address the comments from this code review:
## Individual Comments
### Comment 1
<location path="Server/src/services/tools/manage_gameobject.py" line_range="186-188" />
<code_context>
"prefabFolder": prefab_folder,
"setActive": set_active,
"layer": layer,
+ "isStatic": is_static,
"componentsToRemove": components_to_remove,
"componentProperties": component_properties,
</code_context>
<issue_to_address>
**suggestion:** Avoid sending `"isStatic": None` in the payload when no static change was requested.
`is_static` is currently coerced and left as `None` when unspecified, but the payload always includes:
```python
"isStatic": is_static,
```
so the receiver gets `"isStatic": null`. Even though the C# side handles nullable values, it’s clearer and safer to omit the key when no change is requested. Consider only adding it when `is_static is not None`:
```python
payload = {
"prefabFolder": prefab_folder,
"setActive": set_active,
"layer": layer,
# ...
}
if is_static is not None:
payload["isStatic"] = is_static
```
This matches how other optional fields are handled and avoids relying on `null` semantics.
</issue_to_address>Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
Server/tests/integration/test_manage_gameobject_is_static.py (1)
61-85: Add one more coercion test for"false"You already cover
"true"string coercion; adding"false"would lock in the symmetric parse path and prevent regressions in false-value serialization.🧪 Suggested additional test
+@pytest.mark.asyncio +async def test_manage_gameobject_is_static_string_false_coercion(monkeypatch): + captured = {} + + async def fake_send(cmd, params, **kwargs): + captured["params"] = params + return {"success": True, "data": {}} + + monkeypatch.setattr( + manage_go_mod, + "async_send_command_with_retry", + fake_send, + ) + + resp = await manage_go_mod.manage_gameobject( + ctx=DummyContext(), + action="modify", + target="Ground", + is_static="false", + ) + + assert resp.get("success") is True + assert captured["params"]["isStatic"] is FalseAlso applies to: 87-109
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@Server/tests/integration/test_manage_gameobject_is_static.py` around lines 61 - 85, Add a mirrored test to assert string "false" is coerced to boolean False: duplicate the existing test_manage_gameobject_is_static_string_coercion pattern but call manage_go_mod.manage_gameobject with is_static="false", patch manage_go_mod.async_send_command_with_retry (the fake_send that captures params), await the response and assert resp.get("success") is True and captured["params"]["isStatic"] is False to ensure the false-value serialization path is covered.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Inline comments:
In `@MCPForUnity/Editor/Tools/GameObjects/GameObjectModify.cs`:
- Around line 154-160: The comparison using targetGo.isStatic is wrong for
partial static objects; instead obtain the current flags via
GameObjectUtility.GetStaticEditorFlags(targetGo) and compare to the desired
flags (use desired = isStatic.Value ? (StaticEditorFlags)~0 : 0) and only call
GameObjectUtility.SetStaticEditorFlags(targetGo, desired) if currentFlags !=
desired; update the block referencing isStatic, targetGo.isStatic,
StaticEditorFlags and GameObjectUtility.SetStaticEditorFlags to use
GetStaticEditorFlags for the comparison.
---
Nitpick comments:
In `@Server/tests/integration/test_manage_gameobject_is_static.py`:
- Around line 61-85: Add a mirrored test to assert string "false" is coerced to
boolean False: duplicate the existing
test_manage_gameobject_is_static_string_coercion pattern but call
manage_go_mod.manage_gameobject with is_static="false", patch
manage_go_mod.async_send_command_with_retry (the fake_send that captures
params), await the response and assert resp.get("success") is True and
captured["params"]["isStatic"] is False to ensure the false-value serialization
path is covered.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 3e496cd9-1751-44da-9f2e-f80103e3679d
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
MCPForUnity/Editor/Tools/GameObjects/GameObjectModify.csServer/src/cli/commands/gameobject.pyServer/src/services/tools/manage_gameobject.pyServer/tests/integration/test_manage_gameobject_is_static.py
…ects targetGo.isStatic returns true when *any* flag is set, so a partially static object (e.g. only Navigation) would skip the update when is_static=true was requested. Compare GetStaticEditorFlags() against the desired flags instead. Also adds a "false" string coercion test per review feedback. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Collaborator
|
Thanks for this PR, very helpful! |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
manage_gameobjectserializesisStaticin read output but themodifyaction has no parameter to write it. AI clients can see whether a GameObject is static, but can't change it.This adds
is_static(bool) to themodifyaction, closing the read/write gap.Motivation
Setting up scenes programmatically requires marking objects as static for lightmap baking, navigation, occlusion culling, and batching. Without this parameter, the only workaround is a custom Editor script invoked via
execute_menu_item.Usage
Omitting
is_staticleaves the flag unchanged (fully backwards compatible).Changes
GameObjectModify.cs):isStaticparameter handling after the existinglayerblockmanage_gameobject.py):is_staticparameter with bool coerciongameobject.py):--static/--no-staticflag onmodifytest_manage_gameobject_is_static.py): 4 integration testsTest plan
is_static=True/Falseforwarded correctly"true"→True)Documentation Updates
Summary by Sourcery
Add support for modifying a GameObject's static flag through the manage_gameobject tool, Unity handler, and CLI.
New Features:
Enhancements:
Tests:
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Tests