Maya MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

set_material_property

Set a property such as color or transparency on a Maya material by specifying the material name, attribute, and value; pass RGB values in the 0–1 range for colors.

Instructions

Set a property on a Maya material. For colors pass [r,g,b] (0-1 range). Examples: attribute='color' value=[1,0,0] for red, attribute='transparency' value=[0.5,0.5,0.5].

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": {
      "material_name": "<material_name>",
      "attribute": "<attribute>",
      "value": "<value>"
    },
    "name": "set_material_property"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`value`	Yes
`attribute`	Yes
`material_name`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Oct 29, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

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 burden. It conveys mutation only implicitly through 'Set' and says nothing about whether the change is undoable, what happens if material_name or attribute does not exist, or whether the material must be assigned to geometry for the change to be visible.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, with examples that add real information rather than filler. The examples are slightly redundant with the range statement but still earn their place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description covers the essential shape of a call for the two non-obvious parameters. It is still thin on preconditions for a mutation tool and leaves the value-type ambiguity unresolved, which is the main completeness gap.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does explain attribute/value semantics including the 0-1 range and concrete examples. However, it conflicts with the schema: value is declared type 'string' while the examples pass arrays like [1,0,0], and material_name is never explained — an agent could easily construct a call that fails validation.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Set a property on a Maya material', which is unambiguous and scoped to materials rather than generic attributes. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling set_attribute, which an agent could plausibly pick for the same intent.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The examples imply how to use it for color and transparency attributes, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs. set_attribute guidance, no prerequisites (does the material need to exist or be assigned?), and no statement of which attributes are valid.

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