Skip to main content
Glama
bruchris

Canvas LMS MCP Server

by bruchris
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

List Submissions Awaiting Grading

list_submissions_awaiting_grading
Read-only

Lists all submissions in a course that still need a human grade, sorted oldest-waiting first.

Instructions

Lists all submissions in a course that still need a human grade, sorted oldest-waiting first.

Surfaces two categories:

  • workflow_state=submitted: assignments submitted by students but not yet graded at all.

  • workflow_state=pending_review: Classic Quiz submissions where Canvas auto-graded the objective questions but left essays or manually-scored questions for the instructor.

Returns a triage list grouped by assignment or Classic Quiz, with per-submission details: student identity, workflow state, submitted_at, and whether the submission has pending manual-grading questions.

Parameters:

  • course_id (required): Canvas course ID to scan.

  • assignment_ids (optional): limit the scan to specific assignment IDs.

  • include_quizzes (default true): include Classic Quiz assignments in the scan.

  • include_assignments (default true): include non-quiz assignments.

  • only_pending_review (default false): when true, return only pending_review submissions (quiz essays awaiting manual scoring), omitting regular ungraded assignments.

Known limitations:

  • New Quizzes (Quizzes.Next) may not appear with 'pending_review' workflow state here; use SpeedGrader or the New Quizzes interface for their grading queue.

  • Fill-in-the-blank answers that Canvas auto-marked are not surfaced.

  • V1 returns submission-level state only; per-question detail is not included.

  • When CANVAS_PSEUDONYMIZE_STUDENTS is enabled, student names are replaced with pseudonyms. Use resolve_pseudonym to look up the real identity.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
course_idYesCanvas course ID to scan for submissions awaiting grading.
assignment_idsNoLimit the scan to these specific assignment IDs (numeric Canvas IDs). When omitted, all assignments in the course are scanned.
include_quizzesNoInclude Classic Quiz assignments in the scan. Default: true. New Quizzes are always covered by the global New Quizzes caveat — see response.caveats.
include_assignmentsNoInclude non-quiz assignments in the scan. Default: true.
only_pending_reviewNoWhen true, return only submissions with workflow_state=pending_review — quiz essays and manually-scored questions that Canvas auto-graded but left for human review. When false (default), return both submitted (ungraded) and pending_review submissions.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed8 schema fields changedv1.18.15
    • addedInput schema / properties / assignment_ids / items / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+    "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+    "type": "integer"
+  },
+  {
+    "pattern": "^[1-9][0-9]{0,18}$",
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+]
    • removedInput schema / properties / assignment_ids / items / exclusiveMinimum
      Removed value: -0
    • removedInput schema / properties / assignment_ids / items / maximum
      Removed value: -9007199254740991
    • removedInput schema / properties / assignment_ids / items / type
      Removed value: -"integer"
    • addedInput schema / properties / course_id / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+    "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+    "type": "integer"
+  },
+  {
+    "pattern": "^[1-9][0-9]{0,18}$",
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+]
    • removedInput schema / properties / course_id / exclusiveMinimum
      Removed value: -0
    • removedInput schema / properties / course_id / maximum
      Removed value: -9007199254740991
    • removedInput schema / properties / course_id / type
      Removed value: -"integer"
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv1.18.11
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  3. Addedv1.18.3

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false), yet the description adds substantial behavior beyond them: sort order (oldest-waiting first), grouping by assignment/quiz, returned fields, four concrete limitations, and the pseudonymization behavior with a pointer to resolve_pseudonym.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loads the core purpose in one sentence, then uses clear labeled sections for categories, parameters, and limitations. The parameter block is somewhat redundant with the 100%-covered schema, costing a little efficiency, but nothing is padded.

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 no output schema, the description compensates by describing the return shape (triage list grouped by assignment/quiz with per-submission fields). Combined with the documented limitations and pseudonymization caveat, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret this tool.

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 every parameter is already documented in the schema, including the pending_review semantics and defaults. The description's parameter section largely restates the same information without adding new syntax or format detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (Lists), resource (submissions in a course), and scope (those still needing a human grade, sorted oldest-waiting first). The two workflow_state categories are enumerated, which clearly separates this triage tool from the generic sibling list_submissions.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explains exactly when each category applies (submitted = ungraded at all; pending_review = quiz essays left after auto-grading) and when to use only_pending_review. It also names the when-not case explicitly, routing New Quizzes grading to SpeedGrader or the New Quizzes interface.

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