update_moduleUpdate an existing module (rename, reposition, publish/unpublish).
Update an existing module (rename, reposition, publish/unpublish).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | No | New name for the module | |
| position | No | New position in the module list | |
| course_id | Yes | The Canvas course ID | |
| module_id | Yes | The Canvas module ID | |
| published | No | Whether the module is published |
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}$",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+]Input schema / properties / course_id / typeRemoved value: -"number"Input schema / properties / module_id / anyOfAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+ "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ {
+ "pattern": "^[1-9][0-9]{0,18}$",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+]Input schema / properties / module_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 openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=true, but the description adds nothing beyond that: it does not explain the consequences of unpublishing, that repositioning alters module ordering, whether changes are reversible, or any permission requirements. Its parenthetical largely restates the schema parameters.
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 short sentence with the operation front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though the parenthetical is mostly redundant with the schema.
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?
Required IDs and all five parameters are fully covered by the schema and annotations carry the safety profile, so nothing essential is missing. However, for a destructive mutation, the absence of any consequence or ordering guidance leaves it at merely adequate.
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%, so every parameter is already documented in the schema. The description lists the same fields (rename/reposition/publish) without adding format, default, or interaction detail, so the baseline of 3 applies.
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?
The description states a specific verb and resource ("Update an existing module") and enumerates the mutable operations (rename, reposition, publish/unpublish). It is clearly distinguishable from update_module_item/delete_module_item by naming 'module' rather than 'module item', though it never explicitly contrasts with those siblings.
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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as update_module_item. The only usage signal is the implicit assumption that the module already exists.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.