get_missing_assignmentsIdentify past-due Canvas assignments you have not submitted, including the course and due date, so you can see what work is missing.
Past-due Canvas assignments you have not submitted, with the course and the day each was due. Example: "What am I missing in Canvas?"
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds the meaningful behavioral detail that only unsubmitted past-due items are returned, plus the returned fields (course, due day). It omits edge cases like items due today or late-but-submitted work.
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?
Two short sentences: the scope declaration first, then a concrete user-phrasing example. Nothing is wasted and the key filter is front-loaded.
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?
With no parameters and no output schema, the description carries the burden well by naming the returned fields (course and due day). Minor gaps remain around timezone/cutoff semantics for 'past-due' and whether late submissions are excluded, but an agent can call this correctly as-is.
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?
The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline applies. No misleading parameter implications are present.
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?
States a specific resource with a precise filter: 'past-due Canvas assignments you have not submitted'. The 'past-due' + 'not submitted' scope cleanly separates it from get_upcoming_due_dates, get_todo and get_assignments without needing to name them.
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 example query "What am I missing in Canvas?" gives an unambiguous trigger condition for an agent routing user intent. It stops short of explicitly naming the sibling tools to avoid (get_upcoming_due_dates, get_todo), so it is not a full 5.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.