Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Houdini MCP

Houdini MCP

by beatreichenbach
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

list_usd_prims

List USD prims on a stage with optional filters for root path, depth, prim type, and kind to inspect specific scene content.

Instructions

List USD prims on a stage with filtering.

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": "list_usd_prims"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindNo
depthNo
node_pathYes
prim_typeNo
root_pathNo/
traverse_instance_proxiesNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.3/5.0
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 and largely drops it. It never states that listing is a read-only operation, what the result ordering or shape is, whether large stages are paginated or truncated, or what traverse_instance_proxies or depth actually do to the traversal.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, which is structurally sound. However, the brevity comes at the cost of substance rather than from efficiency, leaving the agent under-informed.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Six parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and a one-line description: the definition does not supply nearly enough for an agent to call this correctly, especially given the null-defaulted filter parameters whose semantics are entirely undocumented.

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 six parameters, so the description must compensate and does not: it never explains prim_type, kind, depth, root_path, traverse_instance_proxies, or even which parameter identifies the stage. "with filtering" hints that some parameters are filters but names none of them.

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 gives a clear verb+resource: "List USD prims on a stage." It does not distinguish this tool from close siblings such as find_usd_prims, get_prims, or get_last_modified_prims, so an agent cannot tell from the text alone which of these to pick.

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?

"with filtering" implies the tool narrows results, but there is no statement of when to use this versus find_usd_prims or get_prims, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The agent gets no routing guidance.

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