Skip to main content
Glama

get_usd_attribute

Retrieve a USD attribute value from a specified prim to inspect scene data, with optional time and sample controls for targeted Houdini USD workflows.

Instructions

Read a USD attribute value from a prim.

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>",
      "prim_path": "<prim_path>",
      "attr_name": "<attr_name>"
    },
    "name": "get_usd_attribute"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fullNo
timeNo
limitNo
offsetNo
attr_nameYes
node_pathYes
prim_pathYes
all_samplesNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only implies read-only behavior through the verb 'Read'. It says nothing about pagination behavior (limit default 64, offset), time sampling, array handling, or whether a missing attribute raises an error or returns null — all material for a reader tool with 8 parameters.

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. It is efficient, though its brevity is achieved by omitting substance rather than by tight editing.

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 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, a single sentence is not sufficient. The agent knows what the tool reads but not how results are paged, sampled, or shaped, which is the information this definition most needs to supply.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% across 8 parameters, so the description must compensate and does not. Non-obvious parameters such as full, time, all_samples, limit, and offset are given no meaning whatsoever, leaving the agent to guess at sampling and pagination semantics.

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?

The description names a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('a USD attribute value from a prim'), which is enough to distinguish it from the write-side sibling set_usd_attribute and from the plural get_usd_attributes. It stops short of explicitly saying how it differs from those siblings, so it is clear but not differentiating.

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_usd_attributes, get_attribute_info, or get_attrib_values, and no stated preconditions such as needing an open stage or a valid prim path. The agent must infer the selection criteria entirely from the tool name.

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