Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Houdini MCP

Houdini MCP

by beatreichenbach
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

render_quad_view

Capture all four Houdini viewport panes as separate images with optional resolution and output path settings.

Instructions

Capture all four viewport panes to separate images.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "render_quad_view"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resolutionNo
output_pathNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and discloses very little. It does not say that files are written to disk, what image format or naming convention results, what happens when output_path is null, or whether the operation overwrites existing files — all critical for a capture/write tool.

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 or redundancy. It is efficient, though its brevity contributes to the gaps in the other dimensions rather than reflecting deliberate scope-setting.

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?

Two optional parameters, no annotations, and no output schema mean the description is the only source of behavioral detail, and it supplies none beyond the headline action. An agent cannot determine where images land, what resolution defaults to, or how many files are produced.

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 both parameters, so the description must compensate, but it never mentions either parameter. "Separate images" vaguely hints at multiple output files, yet it says nothing about how output_path is interpreted or what resolution means (pixels per pane? aspect ratio?).

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 resource ("Capture") and a precise scope ("all four viewport panes to separate images"), which implicitly separates it from a single-pane capture sibling. It does not explicitly name render_viewport or capture_screenshot, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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?

The phrase "all four viewport panes" implies the tool is for multi-pane capture as opposed to single-viewport capture, which is usable context. However, there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative such as render_viewport.

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