EduBase MCP Server

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

edubase_get_integration

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve integration details, including title, type, active status, and LTI version, to verify configuration and compatibility.

Instructions

Get the details of an integration: title, type (api, moodle, canvas, d2l, schoology, lms), whether it is active and its LTI version.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`integration`	Yes	integration identification string

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	No
`lti`	No
`type`	Yes
`title`	Yes
`active`	Yes
`integration`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 schema fields changedv2.0.0Sep 15, 2026
- removedOutput schema / properties / active / description
```
Removed value: -"integration is active"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / id / description
```
Removed value: -"external unique integration identifier (if set for the integration)"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / integration / description
```
Removed value: -"integration identification string"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / lti / description
```
Removed value: -"LTI version (1.0/1.1 or 1.3), only present if the integration is an LMS"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / title / description
```
Removed value: -"title of the integration"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / type / description
```
Removed value: -"type of the integration"
```

Changed3 schema fields changedv1.2.15Sep 2, 2026

removedOutput schema / properties / name

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "title of the integration",
-  "type": "string"
-}

addedOutput schema / properties / title

Added value: +{
+  "description": "title of the integration",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "integration",
-  "name",
-  "type",
-  "active"
-]New value: +[
+  "integration",
+  "title",
+  "type",
+  "active"
+]

Changed3 schema fields changedv1.2.5May 27, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / lti / description

Previous value: -"LTI version, only present if the integration is an LMS"New value: +"LTI version (1.0/1.1 or 1.3), only present if the integration is an LMS"

addedOutput schema / properties / lti / enum

Added value: +[
+  "1.0/1.1",
+  "1.3"
+]

changedOutput schema / properties / lti / type

Previous value: -"boolean"New value: +"string"

Changed2 schema fields changedv1.1.2Mar 13, 2026

addedInput schema / $schema

Added value: +"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "active": {
+      "description": "integration is active",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "external unique integration identifier (if set for the integration)"
+    },
+    "integration": {
+      "description": "integration identification string",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "lti": {
+      "description": "LTI version, only present if the integration is an LMS",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "description": "title of the integration",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "type": {
+      "description": "type of the integration",
+      "enum": [
+        "api",
+        "moodle",
+        "canvas",
+        "d2l",
+        "schoology",
+        "lms"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "integration",
+    "name",
+    "type",
+    "active"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv1.0.22Feb 21, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds value by specifying the exact fields returned (title, type, active status, LTI version), which tells the agent what it can expect from a read operation. No contradiction; it's consistent with the read-only and non-destructive profile.

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 description is a single, front-loaded sentence that states the purpose and the key return fields. There is no fluff or redundancy; every word contributes to the agent's understanding.

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 an output schema present, the description does not need to specify return format. It covers the tool's purpose, the specific integration it targets, and the behavioral attributes. The parameter is simple and documented. Nothing an agent needs to call this successfully is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% (the single 'integration' parameter has a description: 'integration identification string'). The tool description adds nothing about the parameter's format or how to construct it, so it relies on the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already documents the parameter.

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?

The description states a specific verb ('Get'), the object ('details of an integration'), and enumerates exactly what those details are (title, type with enumerated options, active status, LTI version). This leaves no ambiguity about the tool's function and distinguishes it from the plural 'get_integrations' sibling.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description clearly identifies that this tool fetches a single integration's details, which is sufficient to route an agent to it. It does not explicitly name alternative tools for listing or modifying integrations, but given the self-descriptive name and clear scope, an agent can infer when to use it. Lacks an explicit 'use X instead' but not critical.

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

Deploy Server