Skip to main content
Glama
bruchris

Canvas LMS MCP Server

by bruchris
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Set Student Assignment Dates

set_student_assignment_dates
Destructive

Set a student's due and availability dates across all or selected course assignments, applying per-assignment overrides and tolerating partial failures.

Instructions

Fan a due-date / availability override for a specific student across all (or a filtered subset of) assignments in a course. Creates one student-set override per assignment via the Canvas assignment overrides API. Partial failures are tolerated — a failure on one assignment does not abort the rest. Note: for courses with many assignments this makes one Canvas API call per assignment. V1 is create-only: if an override for this student already exists on an assignment, Canvas returns a 422 and that assignment appears in the failed[] list. Use list_assignment_overrides to audit first. Dates must be ISO 8601 strings. To shift dates by a relative amount, first call list_assignments with include=overrides to retrieve current dates, compute absolute timestamps, then call this tool. Returns the standard fan-out envelope: separated applied[], skipped[] (unused in this create-only version, always empty), and failed[] (each with an error) arrays, a not_found list, and a summary of counts. Any assignment_ids that do not exist in the course are reported in not_found (they are neither applied nor failed). Provide user_id as the real Canvas user ID. If CANVAS_PSEUDONYMIZE_STUDENTS is enabled, call resolve_pseudonym first to obtain the real user_id from a pseudonym.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleNoLabel for each override (e.g. "Disability accommodation"). Defaults to "Student accommodation".
due_atNoNew due date in ISO 8601 format. Pass null to remove the due date.
lock_atNoAvailability close date in ISO 8601 format. Pass null to remove.
user_idYesReal Canvas user ID of the student to accommodate
course_idYesCanvas course ID
unlock_atNoAvailability open date in ISO 8601 format. Pass null to remove.
assignment_idsNoLimit the fan-out to these specific assignment IDs (provide at least one). Omit entirely to target all assignments in the course. IDs not present in the course are returned in not_found, not applied/failed.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 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"
  2. Changed6 schema fields changedv1.18.8
    • removedInput schema / properties / due_at / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
    • addedInput schema / properties / due_at / type
      Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
    • removedInput schema / properties / lock_at / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
    • addedInput schema / properties / lock_at / type
      Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
    • removedInput schema / properties / unlock_at / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
    • addedInput schema / properties / unlock_at / type
      Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
  3. Addedv1.18.3

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the destructive/write hint in annotations, the description discloses that it creates one override per assignment, does not overwrite existing overrides (V1 create-only), returns a 'standard fan-out envelope', handles not_found assignment IDs, and is influenced by the CANVAS_PSEUDONYMIZE_STUDENTS environment flag. This is substantial behavioral transparency.

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?

The description is dense but front-loaded with the core purpose and fan-out semantics. It is longer than a typical definition but every sentence carries operational value (create-only behavior, failure handling, pseudonym prerequisite). Minor redundancy with schema text on null/omit behavior and a typo ('Fan out' appears as 'Fan').

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?

Given there is no output schema, the description fills the gap by explaining the return behavior (applied/failed arrays, not_found for bad assignment IDs), the create-only limitation, and the prerequisite for resolving pseudonymized users. This is high contextual completeness for a mutation with 7 parameters and 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 already covers 100% of parameters with descriptions)Skip redundant explanation not needed. The description adds meaningful guidance beyond the schema: omit assignment_ids to apply to all assignments, pass null to clear dates, and the requirement to provide the real Canvas user ID (with pseudonym resolution). This adds value without repeating schema content excessively.

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 clearly states a specific action: creating per-student overrides (due date and availability dates) across course assignments. It distinguishes itself from related tools by emphasizing the fan-out, create-only behavior and the ONE student-to-ALL/selected assignments scope.

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?

Provides clear guidance: use `list_assignment_overrides` to audit existing overridesho, call `resolve_pseudonym` when pseudonyms are enabled, and omit assignment_ids to target all assignments. It lacks an explicit contrast with sibling tools like create_assignment_override, but the create-only fan-out behavior effectively frames when it is appropriate.

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