Skip to main content
Glama
healkeiser

fxhoudinimcp

by healkeiser
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

list_children

List child nodes under a Houdini network path, with optional recursion or type filtering, to inspect scene hierarchy and avoid scanning large networks.

Instructions

List children of a network node.

Avoid recursive=True on large networks — it can return hundreds or thousands of nodes. Prefer find_nodes with a specific pattern instead. A recursive listing does not enter locked assets (a POP or FLIP solver's insides): the asset itself is listed, flagged locked_asset.

Args: ctx: MCP context. parent_path: Parent network path. recursive: Include all descendants (use sparingly on large scenes). filter_type: Node type filter (e.g. 'box', 'merge'). include_locked_assets: With recursive, also list what locked assets contain.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
recursiveNo
filter_typeNo
parent_pathYes
include_locked_assetsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.25.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / include_locked_assets
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "title": "Include Locked Assets",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv2.24.1
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  3. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and delivers real behavioral context: recursive listings can explode to hundreds/thousands of nodes, and recursion does not descend into locked assets (POP/FLIP internals), which are surfaced and flagged `locked_asset`. It does not mention the return shape (paths vs names) or any read-only confirmation, keeping it from a 5.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Purpose is front-loaded, followed by the risk warning and behavioral caveat, then a compact Args block. No sentence is redundant and the most decision-relevant content (the recursive warning) appears before the parameter list.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given zero schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description does an unusually good job covering parameters, the recursive hazard, and locked-asset semantics. The main residual gap is the return format (path list vs node names), which an agent would still want to know.

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 its Args block documents all four parameters with meaning beyond the raw schema: parent_path as the parent network path, recursive as all-descendants with a caution, filter_type with examples ('box', 'merge'), and include_locked_assets as governing whether locked-asset contents are expanded.

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 first sentence states a specific verb and resource: 'List children of a network node.' It also names the sibling `find_nodes` as the alternative for large networks, which helps differentiate it from generic query tools. It stops short of a 5 because the differentiation is framed around avoiding a mode rather than crisply contrasting the tool's core identity against its neighbors.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit when-not guidance ('Avoid recursive=True on large networks') plus a named alternative ('Prefer find_nodes with a specific pattern instead'). An agent knows both the failure mode and the substitute, which is exactly what usage guidance should provide.

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