Skip to main content
Glama
healkeiser

fxhoudinimcp

by healkeiser
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

write_cache

Execute a Houdini cache node to write a frame range to disk, returning whether files appeared. Use background mode to keep working while it saves.

Instructions

Execute a cache node, and report whether a cache actually appeared.

Foreground by default: Houdini shows its own progress dialog and the user can cancel. The call holds until the write finishes, however long that is; a client that hands a long call to a background task notifies you with the verdict when it lands. Do nothing else in Houdini meanwhile (every other call queues behind the write) and never poll the disk.

success and wrote_files reflect the files on disk and the errors of the node that did the writing -- a filecache delegates to an internal ROP and stays silent itself, so a failed write used to be reported as success. Errors are named with the node they came from.

Args: ctx: MCP context. node_path: Path to the cache node. frame_range: [start, end] frame range to render. Overrides the node's $FSTART/$FEND expressions for this and later writes. background: Save from a separate Houdini process (File Cache's own "Save to Disk in Background") so Houdini stays usable, at the cost of the user seeing no progress there. Saves the hip first, returns at once with status "launched"; follow it with get_cache_status. Use it only when asked to keep working while a cache writes. A verified foreground write turns the node's Load from Disk on.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
node_pathYes
backgroundNo
frame_rangeNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.24.1
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so richly: it discloses blocking behavior, progress-dialog/cancel semantics, the hip being saved first, the immediate 'launched' status, the side effect of enabling Load from Disk on verified writes, and the gotcha that filecache delegates to an internal ROP and can silently misreport success.

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?

Front-loads the core behavior and keeps every sentence informational, but it is dense and slightly sprawling with asides (Houdini progress dialog, polling warnings) that could be tightened.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a mutating, non-annotated tool with no output schema and 0% schema coverage, the description covers timing, side effects, return-status semantics, error attribution, and the background protocol end-to-end.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate and it does: it explains frame_range overrides the node's $FSTART/$FEND for this and later writes, and gives background in-depth semantics (separate Houdini process, returns 'launched'); node_path is self-evident from context.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ('Execute a cache node') and its outcome ('report whether a cache actually appeared'), which clearly separates it from siblings like list_caches, get_cache_status, and clear_cache.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use guidance for both modes: foreground is the default (with a warning to not run other Houdini calls and never poll disk), and background is reserved for 'when asked to keep working while a cache writes'; it also names get_cache_status as the required follow-up.

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