Skip to main content
Glama
Fireiscoolsolo

Canvas LMS MCP – Local Edition

by Fireiscoolsolo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Rate Entry

rate_entry

Likes or removes your like on a Canvas discussion entry when ratings are enabled, updating the like count others see.

Instructions

Like (rating 1) or remove your like (rating 0) on a discussion entry, where the instructor enabled ratings. Others see the like count.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ratingYes1 to like, 0 to remove
entry_idYesDiscussion entry ID (numeric string). Get it from get_full_topic_view or list_entries.
topic_idYesDiscussion topic ID (numeric string). Get it from list_topics.
course_idYesCanvas course ID, a numeric string such as "12345". Get it from list_courses.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.0.2
    • changedInput schema / properties / course_id / description
      Previous value: -"Canvas course ID"New value: +"Canvas course ID, a numeric string such as \"12345\". Get it from list_courses."
    • changedInput schema / properties / entry_id / description
      Previous value: -"Canvas ID (numeric string)"New value: +"Discussion entry ID (numeric string). Get it from get_full_topic_view or list_entries."
    • changedInput schema / properties / topic_id / description
      Previous value: -"Canvas ID (numeric string)"New value: +"Discussion topic ID (numeric string). Get it from list_topics."
  2. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (not read-only, not destructive, not idempotent, open-world). The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: the like count is visible to others and ratings only work when enabled by the instructor.

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?

A single efficient sentence with the core action and rating semantics front-loaded. No wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple rating toggle with a fully described schema and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It covers the action, rating values, precondition, and visibility side effect; minor gaps like error behavior when ratings are disabled are acceptable.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description restates the rating mapping (1 = like, 0 = remove), which is useful but adds no semantics beyond the 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: liking or removing a like on a discussion entry. It also includes the key precondition that ratings must be enabled by the instructor, making the action unambiguous.

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?

It clearly explains the two rating values and the condition under which the tool applies (instructor-enabled ratings). It does not explicitly name alternatives or describe when not to use it beyond that precondition, but usage is clear.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools