Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Houdini MCP

Houdini MCP

by beatreichenbach
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_material_info

Retrieves detailed information about a Houdini material node from its node path, helping you inspect material properties and parameters before making changes.

Instructions

Get detailed information about a material node.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "node_path": "<node_path>"
    },
    "name": "get_material_info"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
node_pathYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full disclosure burden, yet it only implies a read operation. It says nothing about what fields are returned, whether the node must be cooked/exist, error behavior for invalid paths, or side effects.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. The brevity is efficient, though it borders on under-specification given the lack of other documentation.

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 an undocumented required path parameter, no annotations, and no output schema, the description should explain path format and the shape of the returned material data. Neither is covered, leaving the agent to guess before invoking.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% for the single required parameter node_path, and the description only echoes the concept of a 'material node' without specifying path syntax, root notation, or whether relative paths are accepted. It does not compensate for the schema gap.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description states a verb and resource ('Get detailed information about a material node'), which is clearer than a bare name. However, 'detailed information' is vague about what is actually returned, and it does not distinguish this tool from close siblings like get_node_info or get_usd_bound_material.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus get_node_info, get_usd_bound_material, or the other get_*_info siblings. The agent must infer the selection criteria entirely from the names.

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