Skip to main content
Glama

Cubite LMS: Learning Management System

by io.cubite
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Update enrollment

enrollment_update

Change one existing enrollment in place, keeping it and the learner's progress: set or clear its access expiry, move the learner off or onto the waitlist, or relabel its status. Use it for every change to an enrollment that exists; to add one use enrollment_create, to remove one enrollment_revoke. Identify the learner by email or userId; a learner not enrolled in that course is a not-found error, and omitted fields stay unchanged. To let a waitlisted learner in, send isWaitListed:false with status:"completed": self-waitlisted learners hold "pending", and learner pages show Start/Continue only for "completed". No email is sent. Returns the updated enrollment {courseId, userId, status, isWaitListed, enrolledAt, expiresAt, user}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailNoLearner's email; pass this or userId.
statusNoFree-text status label, stored as given (trimmed, cut to 64 chars); Cubite itself writes "completed", "pending" or, for learning-path enrollments, "active". Learner pages give the Start/Continue button only to "completed" (on a paid course, only once the learner has paid); with any other label the dashboard card and the course page show an enrollment step instead ("Start Now", "Complete Enrollment" or checkout). Omit it to keep the current label.
userIdNoLearner's user id; pass this or email (userId wins if both are sent).
courseIdYesCourse id (required). For a course linked to Open edX this changes only the Cubite enrollment; to also enroll a waitlisted learner in Open edX, use the dashboard's Unlock button.
expiresAtNoNew access expiry as an ISO 8601 date string (e.g. "2026-12-31"); null removes the expiry (never expires); omit to leave it unchanged.
isWaitListedNofalse promotes the learner off the waitlist; true moves them back onto it. Either way the status label stays as it is unless you also send status.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the description carries the rest and delivers: omitted fields stay unchanged (PATCH semantics), non-enrolled learner yields a not-found error, no email is sent, and the return shape is listed. These are real behavioral traits beyond the annotation set.

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 what the tool does, then alternatives, then the waitlist recipe, then the return contract. Every sentence is doing work, though the middle paragraph is dense and could be split for scanability.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by spelling out the returned object fields. Combined with the partial-update rule, error case, and side-effect disclosure (no email), an agent has everything required to invoke this mutation correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema already documents each field thoroughly, so the baseline is 3. The description still adds cross-field meaning the schema does not state as a whole: the email-or-userId identification rule, and the isWaitListed:false + status:"completed" combination that self-waitlisted learners need. Not a full 5 because much of the field-level detail is restated.

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 (change/update) on a specific resource (one existing enrollment) and enumerates the three mutation surfaces (expiry, waitlist, status label). It explicitly contrasts itself with enrollment_create and enrollment_revoke, so an agent can distinguish it from siblings without opening any schema.

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 ("every change to an enrollment that exists") and names both alternatives with their selecting conditions (enrollment_create to add, enrollment_revoke to remove). It also supplies a concrete workflow recipe for promoting a waitlisted learner, which is exactly the kind of guidance an agent needs.

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

All Cubite LMS: Learning Management System toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources