Show or hide a USD prim and all its descendants by specifying the prim path and a visible boolean.
Show or hide a prim (and its descendants).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| visible | No | True to show, False to hide | |
| prim_path | Yes | Full USD path of the prim, e.g. "/World/Robot" |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context by noting that hiding/showing a prim also affects its descendants, which is not captured by annotations or schema.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every element (operation, resource, descendant scope) earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given an output schema exists and annotations cover the safety profile, the description provides enough core information for an agent to invoke the tool correctly. It could be slightly richer with usage guidance, but the essential operation and scope are present.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, with both parameters documented including an example prim path and the meaning of visible. The description does not add parameter-level detail beyond indicating that the operation applies to a prim and its descendants, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb pair (show/hide) applied to a specific resource (a prim) and explicitly states the scope includes descendants. This makes the operation clear and distinguishable from sibling tools like set_prim_transform or delete_prim.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. It merely states the operation, leaving the agent to infer usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.