Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Houdini MCP

Houdini MCP

by beatreichenbach
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

set_parameter

Sets a parameter value for a Houdini node using its node path and parameter name, enabling programmatic adjustment of node settings through MCP clients.

Instructions

Set a parameter value.

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>",
      "parm_name": "<parm_name>",
      "value": "<value>"
    },
    "name": "set_parameter"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
valueYes
node_pathYes
parm_nameYes
run_callbacksNo
override_expressionNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

D1.8/5.0
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. "Set" implies a mutation, but it says nothing about side effects, permissions, whether existing expressions are preserved, what run_callbacks does, or what override_expression changes.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The single sentence contains no filler, but it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise for a five-parameter mutation tool. There is no structure to front-load the key operational context an agent would need.

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?

This is a mutation tool with five parameters, two behavior flags, no annotations, and no output schema. The description omits nearly everything an agent needs in order to invoke it safely and correctly.

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%, so the description must explain the five parameters, but it only echoes "parameter" and "value." It leaves node_path, run_callbacks, and override_expression completely undefined, and gives no format or targeting guidance.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description restates the tool name almost verbatim: set_parameter becomes "Set a parameter value." It gives no distinguishing detail versus siblings such as set_parameters, set_expression, or get_parameter, and does not identify what kind of parameter or node is involved.

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 when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives. An agent cannot tell from the description whether this is for a single parameter, when to prefer set_parameters, or how it relates to set_expression or lock_parameter.

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