Skip to main content
Glama
bruchris

Canvas LMS MCP Server

by bruchris
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Remove Enrollment

remove_enrollment
Destructive

Remove or conclude an enrollment from a course. The 'delete' task is permanent; 'conclude' and 'deactivate' are reversible.

Instructions

Remove or conclude an enrollment from a course. The 'delete' task is permanent; 'conclude' and 'deactivate' are reversible.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
taskYesThe action to perform on the enrollment
course_idYesThe Canvas course ID
enrollment_idYesThe enrollment ID to remove

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.18.15
    • addedInput schema / properties / course_id / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+    "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+    "type": "integer"
+  },
+  {
+    "pattern": "^[1-9][0-9]{0,18}$",
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+]
    • removedInput schema / properties / course_id / type
      Removed value: -"number"
    • addedInput schema / properties / enrollment_id / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+    "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+    "type": "integer"
+  },
+  {
+    "pattern": "^[1-9][0-9]{0,18}$",
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+]
    • removedInput schema / properties / enrollment_id / type
      Removed value: -"number"
  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. First observedv1.18.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new context by telling the agent which task modes are permanent ('delete') versus reversible ('conclude', 'deactivate'), which the annotations cannot express.

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 and the permanence warning immediately after. Every clause carries information the agent needs.

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

Completeness3/5

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

All three required params are documented and the destructive/reversible split is stated, but the description is silent on what data is lost on delete, permission requirements, or side effects on grades/submissions. Adequate but with clear gaps for a destructive mutation tool with no output schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description goes beyond the schema's terse 'The action to perform on the enrollment' by explaining the reversibility semantics of each enum value. That materially helps the agent pick the right task.

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 ('remove or conclude an enrollment from a course'), and the effect is distinguishable from siblings like enroll_user or list_enrollments. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool, so it falls short of the top band.

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?

Guidance is aimed at choosing among the task values (permanent vs reversible) rather than at when to pick this tool over a sibling. That is useful implied usage, but there is no explicit when/when-not or alternative routing.

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