Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Houdini MCP

Houdini MCP

by beatreichenbach
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_render_progress

Retrieve the progress of a Houdini render or write started with start_render by passing the node path, so you can monitor completion status.

Instructions

Progress of a render or write started with start_render.

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_render_progress"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
node_pathYes

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?

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full disclosure burden and falls short: it does not say whether the call is read-only, whether it blocks until completion, what happens if the render is unknown or finished, or what form the progress takes. Only the linkage to start_render is communicated.

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 short sentence with no filler, and the key anchor (start_render) is front-loaded. It is efficient, though the brevity borders on under-specification rather than true conciseness.

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?

No output schema, no annotations, and an undocumented required parameter mean the description should do more work than it does. An agent still cannot tell what a successful response looks like or how to interpret 'progress'.

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% and the single required parameter node_path is never mentioned in the description, so there is no explanation of what path identifies or how it relates to the render job. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 names the resource (render/write progress) and anchors it to the sibling tool that creates the job, which helps distinguish it from start_render. However, it is a noun phrase with no verb, and it never says what the tool actually returns or does with the progress value.

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?

Usage is only implied: the phrase 'started with start_render' signals that this is a follow-up query to a render job. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no guidance on polling cadence, and no clarification of what to do if the referenced job does not exist.

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