Skip to main content
Glama
Fireiscoolsolo

Canvas LMS MCP – Remote Edition

by Fireiscoolsolo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

Mark Module Item Done

mark_module_item_done

Mark a Canvas module item as done to satisfy its completion requirement and show progress in your instructor's view.

Instructions

Mark a module item as done to satisfy a 'mark as done' completion requirement. Shows in your instructor's progress view.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
item_idYesModule item ID (numeric string). Get it from list_module_items.
course_idYesCanvas course ID, a numeric string such as "12345". Get it from list_courses.
module_idYesModule ID (numeric string). Get it from list_modules.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.1.3
    • 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 / item_id / description
      Previous value: -"Canvas ID (numeric string)"New value: +"Module item ID (numeric string). Get it from list_module_items."
    • changedInput schema / properties / module_id / description
      Previous value: -"Canvas ID (numeric string)"New value: +"Module ID (numeric string). Get it from list_modules."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish mutability and non-idempotency, and the description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the action is visible in the instructor's progress view, which tells an agent this is a consequential, observable state change. It stops short of explaining reversibility or what happens on repeat calls (annotations say idempotentHint=false).

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?

Two short sentences, zero filler, with the purpose front-loaded before the visibility consequence. Every clause earns its place.

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 3-parameter, fully documented mutation with annotations and no output schema, this is nearly complete: it covers what the tool does and its user-visible effect. Missing only an undo/repeat-call note, which matters given idempotentHint=false.

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%, and each parameter even names the sibling tool that supplies its ID, so the description need not repeat parameter meaning. It adds nothing beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Mark a module item as done') and frames the purpose (satisfying a 'mark as done' completion requirement), which implicitly separates it from the sibling mark_module_item_read. It never names an alternative explicitly, so the differentiation is only inferential.

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 phrase 'to satisfy a "mark as done" completion requirement' conveys the situation in which this applies, implying it is used when a module item carries a completion requirement rather than for mere read tracking. No explicit when-not guidance or named alternative (e.g., mark_module_item_read) is provided.

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