Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Houdini MCP

Houdini MCP

by beatreichenbach
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_node_card

Retrieve a Houdini node type's connectors, parameters, and help text to inspect node structure before building workflows.

Instructions

Return a node type's connectors, parameters, and help text.

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_type": "<node_type>"
    },
    "name": "get_node_card"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contextNoSop
node_typeYes
parm_filterNo
include_helpNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations and no output schema, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only lookup by naming returned content, but never states that it is non-mutating, how help text is controlled, or what happens with unset optional filters.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is the right shape for a lookup tool. It is arguably too terse rather than bloated, so it loses a point only for leaving no room for the missing operational detail.

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 four-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, one sentence is not enough. An agent cannot tell what a 'node card' shape is, what context values are valid, or whether help text is returned by default.

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% across four parameters. The description only loosely gestures at 'parameters' and 'help text', leaving 'context' (defaulting to 'Sop'), 'parm_filter', and 'include_help' entirely unexplained, including whether null means default or omit.

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?

States a specific verb and enumerates exactly what is returned: a node type's connectors, parameters, and help text. That is more concrete than a generic 'get info', but it never distinguishes itself from siblings like get_node_info or explain_node, which plausibly return overlapping information.

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 call this versus get_node_info, explain_node, or list_node_types, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer usage purely from the phrase 'node card'.

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