Skip to main content
Glama

modify_object

Adjust position, rotation, scale, and other properties of existing 3D objects in Cinema 4D scenes to refine your models and compositions.

Instructions

Modify properties of an existing object.

Args:
    object_name: Name of the object to modify
    properties: Dictionary of properties to modify (position, rotation, scale, etc.)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
object_nameYes
propertiesYes

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function 'modify_object' that sends the modify request to Cinema 4D.
    async def modify_object(
        object_name: str, properties: Dict[str, Any], ctx: Context
    ) -> str:
        """
        Modify properties of an existing object.
    
        Args:
            object_name: Name of the object to modify
            properties: Dictionary of properties to modify (position, rotation, scale, etc.)
        """
        async with c4d_connection_context() as connection:
            if not connection.connected:
                return "❌ Not connected to Cinema 4D"
    
            # Send command to Cinema 4D
            response = send_to_c4d(
                connection,
                {
                    "command": "modify_object",
                    "object_name": object_name,
                    "properties": properties,
                },
            )
    
            return format_c4d_response(response, "modify_object")
  • The MCP tool registration for 'modify_object'.
    @mcp.tool()
    async def modify_object(
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states this modifies existing objects but doesn't mention what happens if the object doesn't exist, whether changes are reversible, what permissions are needed, or what the response looks like. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral questions unanswered.

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 appropriately brief with a clear purpose statement followed by parameter explanations. The 'Args:' section is helpful, though the 'etc.' in the properties explanation could be more precise. Overall, it's efficient without unnecessary elaboration.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a mutation tool with 2 parameters (including a nested object), 0% schema description coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what happens after modification, what error conditions exist, or provide enough detail about the properties parameter to use the tool effectively without trial and error.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds some value by explaining both parameters: 'object_name' identifies the target and 'properties' contains the modifications. However, it doesn't specify valid property names or value formats beyond the vague 'position, rotation, scale, etc.', leaving significant ambiguity about what can actually be modified.

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 description clearly states the verb ('modify') and resource ('properties of an existing object'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from similar sibling tools like 'set_keyframe' or 'group_objects' that might also modify objects in different ways.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With sibling tools like 'set_keyframe' (for animation), 'group_objects' (for organization), and 'apply_material' (for appearance), there's no indication of when this general property modification tool is preferred over more specific tools.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/ttiimmaacc/cinema4d-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server