Cinema4D MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

add_effector

Add a MoGraph effector (random, shader, or field) to a Cinema 4D scene, optionally targeting a cloner or other object to apply its effects.

Instructions

Add a MoGraph Effector to the scene.

Args:
    effector_type: Type of effector (random, shader, field)
    name: Optional name for the effector
    target: Optional target object (e.g., cloner) to apply the effector to

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	No
`target`	No
`effector_type`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.2Sep 10, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only repeats the core action. It does not mention side effects, whether the effector attaches to the scene root or selected object, what happens when target is omitted, or any required scene context.

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 short and front-loaded, with no wasted prose. The Args list compactly maps to the three parameters and adds the necessary detail without redundancy.

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?

The description covers the basic parameters and their intent, and an output schema exists so return values need no explanation. However, it omits important operational context such as what happens when target is None, whether the effector is applied immediately, and whether a scene must already exist.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden. It adds meaningful semantics: effector_type lists the accepted values (random, shader, field), and target clarifies its purpose with a concrete example (cloner). Name is self-explanatory but still briefly described.

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?

Description states a specific verb ('Add') and resource ('MoGraph Effector'), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like apply_mograph_fields, but the distinct action is unambiguous.

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 such as create_mograph_cloner or apply_mograph_fields. The description simply states the action without indicating prerequisites, selection criteria, or exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.