tdmcp

Create cube-map dome

create_cubemap_dome

Creates a TouchDesigner network that renders a cube-map dome master, sampling a real cube map to produce a fisheye fulldome or 360° equirectangular image without pole distortion.

Instructions

Render a true cube-map dome master — the higher-fidelity follow-up to create_dome_output (which only warps a flat equirectangular source). A 3D scene is rendered by a Render TOP in cube-map mode (rendermode 'cubemap', which outputs a real cube-map texture in one render — no separate Cube Map TOP), or an existing cube-map source is pulled in via a Select TOP; then a GLSL TOP samples that cube map by 3D direction (TD's built-in samplerCube sTDCubeInputs[0]) to produce a fisheye fulldome master or a full 360°×180° equirectangular image, ending on a Null ready for setup_output. Creates a new baseCOMP under parent_path (named by name) holding the cube-map source (or the test scene's Geometry/Camera/Light/Render TOP), GLSL remap, and Null output. Sampling a real cube map avoids the equirect pole-pinch/seam. With expose_controls, a live Fov knob sets fisheye coverage and a Rotation knob spins the dome horizon. Returns a summary plus a JSON block with the container path, created node paths, the cube-source/output paths, exposed controls, any node errors, warnings, and an inline preview image.

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": "create_cubemap_dome"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`fov`	No	Fisheye coverage in degrees (the angular diameter the disc spans). 180 = full hemisphere (standard fulldome); larger over-fills, smaller zooms in. Exposed as a live Fov knob; ignored for equirectangular.
`name`	No	Base name for the system container.	cubemap_dome
`source`	No	Optional path to an existing TOP delivering a cube-map texture (e.g. a Render TOP in cube-map mode) to remap. When omitted, a simple test scene (sphere on a grid + camera + light) is rendered by a Render TOP in cube-map mode so the tool is self-contained.
`projection`	No	fisheye: sample the cube map into a centred dome disc (planetarium fulldome master). equirectangular: sweep the cube map into a full 360°×180° latlong image.	fisheye
`resolution`	No	Square dome-master resolution (width = height).	2048
`parent_path`	No	Parent network where the dome container is created (default '/project1').	/project1
`expose_controls`	No	Expose a live Fov knob (and a Rotation knob that spins the dome horizon).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.13.1Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Even with annotations (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=false) already signaling that this tool creates and modifies the scene graph, the description adds substantial behavioral detail: it names the exact node chain (Render TOP in cubemap mode or Select TOP, GLSL TOP sampling sTDCubeInputs[0], Null), explains the source-fallback logic, exposes that the tool creates controls (Fov and Rotation knobs), and states the structured return info (JSON with paths, errors, warnings, preview). This fully discloses side effects and matches the annotations.

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 description is dense and information-rich: each sentence contributes to purpose, pipeline, side effects, or output. While it is long, it remains front-loaded with the core intent and tradeoff. A slight restructuring into separate sections could improve scannability, but the content is efficient.

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 complex tool with 7 parameters and no output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: the render process, source handling, projection modes, created components, exposed controls, and the return value (summary plus JSON with paths, errors, warnings, preview). This gives an agent everything needed to correctly select and invoke the tool.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, with all 7 parameters already provided rich details (e.g., fov gives an angular range, projection enums have explicit definitions, source has a fallback explanation). The description adds only marginal conceptual value beyond the schema, such as the note that real cube-map sampling avoids the equirect pole-pinch/seam, but does not meaningfully extend parameter understanding.

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?

The description opens with a specific, action-oriented phrase ('Render a true cube-map dome master') and immediately distinguishes the tool from the sibling create_dome_output, calling it 'the higher-fidelity follow-up' that only warps a flat equirectangular source. It clearly enumerates the output resource (a baseCOMP containing a cube-map source, GLSL remap, and Null output) and the two projection modes (fisheye and equirectangular).

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?

The description explicitly names an alternative tool (create_dome_output) and explains the fidelity tradeoff, making it clear when this tool is the better choice. It also describes what happens if no source is provided (a self-contained test scene) and notes the output ends 'on a Null ready for setup_output', providing downstream pipeline context.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server