Skip to main content
Glama
healkeiser

fxhoudinimcp

by healkeiser
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

create_material

Create a Houdini material in /mat with configurable base color, roughness, metallic, and opacity for Principled or MaterialX shading.

Instructions

Create a material in /mat with configurable surface properties.

Args: name: Material node name; refused if taken. Default: material1, numbered up when that exists. mat_type: Material type ("principled", "materialx"). base_color: [R, G, B] base color, 0-1 per channel. roughness: Surface roughness, 0-1. metallic: Metallic factor, 0-1. opacity: Opacity, 0-1.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
opacityNo
mat_typeNoprincipled
metallicNo
roughnessNo
base_colorNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv2.24.1
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / name / default
      Previous value: -"material1"New value: +null
    • removedInput schema / properties / name / type
      Removed value: -"string"
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose one genuine behavioral trait beyond the schema: the name is refused if taken and auto-numbers up from 'material1'. However, it says nothing about persistence, required connection state, or other side effects of creating a material.

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?

The purpose is front-loaded in a single sentence, followed by an Args block that is uniformly terse. Little waste, though the naming default explanation spans two lines that could be tightened.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a creation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the parameter documentation is solid, but the description omits any statement of the returned material handle/node path or the operational context (connection requirement, undo behavior) an agent needs before calling.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: every one of the six parameters gets a meaning and, for the numeric ones, a 0-1 range. Only mat_type is weakly specified, listing enum-like values ('principled', 'materialx') without stating whether others are valid.

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 ('Create a material') plus the target location '/mat' and scoping ('configurable surface properties'). It distinguishes reasonably from create_material_network and create_node, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with those siblings.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus create_material_network, create_node, or assign_material, and no prerequisites (e.g. a live Houdini connection) are mentioned. The agent must infer usage entirely.

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