Skip to main content
Glama
HoldMyBeer-gg

blend-ai

by HoldMyBeer-gg
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

set_material_property

Set metallic, roughness, emission, alpha, or other Principled BSDF properties on a named Blender material to adjust its appearance for rendering.

Instructions

Set a property on a material's Principled BSDF node.

Args: material_name: Name of the material. property: Property to set. One of: metallic, roughness, specular_ior_level, emission_strength, alpha, transmission_weight, ior, coat_weight, coat_roughness, sheen_weight, sheen_roughness, anisotropic, anisotropic_rotation, subsurface_weight, emission_color. value: The value to set. Float for most properties, list for color properties.

Returns: Confirmation dict.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
valueYes
propertyYes
material_nameYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.7.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • addedInput schema / properties / property / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "alpha",
+  "anisotropic",
+  "anisotropic_rotation",
+  "coat_roughness",
+  "coat_weight",
+  "emission_color",
+  "emission_strength",
+  "ior",
+  "metallic",
+  "roughness",
+  "sheen_roughness",
+  "sheen_weight",
+  "specular_ior_level",
+  "subsurface_weight",
+  "transmission_weight"
+]
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool mutates a Principled BSDF node and returns a confirmation dict, but says nothing about prerequisites (e.g., material must exist), permission needs, reversibility, error behavior, or whether a missing node is created. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 front-loaded with the core action, then uses Args and Returns sections. The property list is long but necessary for the enum, and the Returns line is slightly redundant given the output schema exists. Overall, well-structured and efficient.

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 simple property setter, the description covers the action, parameters, and return. However, with no annotations and 0% schema coverage, it should mention prerequisites and edge-case behavior (e.g., what happens if the material lacks a Principled BSDF node). The output schema means the return description is not strictly needed, but the missing usage and behavioral context leave clear gaps.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does partially: it enumerates the valid property values (redundant with the enum but confirms) and explains that value should be a float for most properties and a list for color properties. However, material_name is left unexplained and there are no further format or constraint details.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb ('Set') and resource ('a property on a material's Principled BSDF node'), distinguishing it from generic shader node tools and material color tools. An agent can tell exactly what this does without opening the schema.

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 enumerated property list implicitly signals when to use this tool (to set one of those Principled BSDF properties), but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives like set_shader_node_property or set_material_color. Usage context is implied 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