get_calendar_feed_urlRetrieve your personal Canvas calendar feed URL and subscription steps for Google Calendar, Apple Calendar, or Outlook so course deadlines sync automatically.
Your personal Canvas calendar feed link and how to subscribe to it in Google Calendar, Apple Calendar or Outlook, so Canvas deadlines show up there and stay updated.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the feed is personal and that the response includes subscription instructions, but it omits the important behavioral detail that a feed URL typically embeds a secret token and should be treated as sensitive/not shared.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with the resource first and the practical benefit last. Slightly padded by the 'so Canvas deadlines show up there and stay updated' clause, but it conveys the reason the caller wants it.
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 output schema, the description must hint at the return shape; it does so by naming a 'feed link' plus 'how to subscribe'. It stops short of saying whether the URL is tokenized, how long it is valid, or whether it can be regenerated – details an agent may need when relaying it to a user.
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?
Zero parameters, so baseline is 4; the description correctly implies the call takes no input and is user-scoped ('your personal'). Nothing further is needed.
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 the specific resource returned (personal Canvas calendar feed link) plus subscription instructions, which clearly separates it from list_calendar_events and export_deadlines_ics without naming a sibling. The verb 'get' is only implied by the name rather than the text, but the resource is unambiguous.
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?
Usage is implied by the framing 'how to subscribe to it in Google Calendar, Apple Calendar or Outlook' – an agent can infer this is for setting up external calendar subscription. However, there is no explicit when-to-use vs when-not, and no mention of the overlapping sibling export_deadlines_ics, which also exports deadlines for calendar import.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.