Skip to main content
Glama

add_visibility_overrides

Grant or deny group access to published courses by batch-adding visibility overrides. Set is_visible true to allowlist or false to blocklist a course for the group.

Instructions

Grant or deny a group access to published courses. This is a BATCH operation.

    `id` is the GROUP id. `overrides` is the batch: each item needs
    `published_course_id` - the
    published-course id, not the course id - and may set `is_visible`:

      `is_visible: true`  (the DEFAULT) an ALLOWLIST entry: members see the course
                          even though it is hidden by default
      `is_visible: false` a BLOCKLIST entry: members do NOT see the course even
                          though it is visible by default

    THE UNIQUE KEY INCLUDES `is_visible`, so adding true and then false for the same
    course creates TWO rows that contradict each other rather than the second
    replacing the first. Remove the one you do not want; Skilljar's own guidance is
    to keep only one.

    Idempotent: re-adding an identical override succeeds and changes nothing, so a
    success here does not mean access changed. Duplicates within one batch are
    first-wins.

    An unknown group is a not-found error whatever else is in the request.

    Requires the `student-groups:write` OAuth scope.
    

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
overridesYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idsYes
noteYes
totalYes
failedYes
succeededYes
Install Server

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

The description richly discloses behavioral details: the unique key includes is_visible, contradictory rows can be created, duplicates are first-wins, unknown groups produce not-found errors, and success does not mean access changed. However, it states 'Idempotent' while annotations set idempotentHint to false, which is a direct annotation contradiction.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the remaining paragraphs are well-structured around genuinely important caveats. The unique-key warning and idempotency explanation are necessary, not filler, and nothing repeats the schema.

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?

For a batch mutation tool with zero schema-level parameter descriptions, this covers required fields, error behavior, duplicate handling, and OAuth scope. Since an output schema exists, not explaining return values is acceptable, leaving no meaningful completeness gap.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden of parameter meaning. It explains that id is the group id and that overrides is a batch requiring published_course_id, not the course id, with optional is_visible true/false semantics. This adds substantial meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 ('Grant or deny') and resource ('group access to published courses'), and identifies itself as a batch operation. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling visibility tools like list_visibility_overrides and remove_visibility_overrides.

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 description implies the intended use case through the grant/deny semantics and batch framing, but it never explicitly says when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention relevant siblings or exclusions, leaving tool selection partly to inference.

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

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/CloudSecurityAlliance/csa-skilljar'

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