Get Quiz
get_quizGet details for a single quiz by ID.
Instructions
Get details for a single quiz by ID.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| quiz_id | Yes | The Canvas quiz ID | |
| course_id | Yes | The Canvas course ID |
get_quizGet details for a single quiz by ID.
Get details for a single quiz by ID.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| quiz_id | Yes | The Canvas quiz ID | |
| course_id | Yes | The Canvas course ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.18.15Input schema / properties / course_id / anyOfAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+ "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ {
+ "pattern": "^[1-9][0-9]{0,18}$",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+]Input schema / properties / course_id / typeRemoved value: -"number"Input schema / properties / quiz_id / anyOfAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+ "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ {
+ "pattern": "^[1-9][0-9]{0,18}$",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+]Input schema / properties / quiz_id / typeRemoved value: -"number"v1.18.11Input schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"v1.18.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that — no indication of what 'details' contains, whether the quiz must belong to the given course, or what happens if the IDs don't match.
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 zero filler; the resource and lookup key come first. It is efficient, though its brevity reflects under-specification as much as discipline.
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?
For a simple two-parameter read with full schema coverage and annotations, the description is minimally adequate. With no output schema, it could have hinted at what 'details' returns, and it never notes that two IDs must be supplied.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, with both course_id and quiz_id documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description only restates 'by ID' and adds no format, constraint, or pairing semantics beyond the schema.
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 a specific verb and resource ('Get details for a single quiz') and the lookup key ('by ID'), which distinguishes it from list_quizzes. It does not differentiate from other single-quiz siblings such as get_new_quiz_item, so it stops short of a 5.
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?
There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no named alternatives. The word 'single' weakly implies contrast with list_quizzes, but the agent gets no routing rule for choosing between this and the other quiz-fetching tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.