Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

infinitecampus-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

ic_list_messages

Read-only

Retrieve all parent-visible messages from three Infinite Campus sources: prism alerts, Messenger inbox, portal announcements. Each source returns its own count and items; errors isolated per section.

Instructions

List all parent-visible messages from three IC sources combined: (1) prism notifications (assignment alerts, grade postings, attendance alerts), (2) Messenger 2.0 inbox (teacher messages, district announcements with newMessage/actionRequired flags), and (3) portal userNotice announcements. Each section has its own count and items; if any source errors, that section contains an error field and the others still return normally. The limit arg caps the prism notifications only (the high-volume source). Note: listing inbox messages does not mark them as read in normal portal behavior, but some district configurations may update read-tracking; use ic_get_message for the full HTML body.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
viewNoResponse shape: "compact" (default) drops fields the response already carries elsewhere; "full" returns every field this server understands. compact strips image/avatar URLs from the response; "full" returns Infinite Campus's payload untouched. No field projection: this server has no verified record of which Infinite Campus fields matter, and inventing one would risk dropping a field a caller needs.
limitNoNumber of prism notifications to retrieve (default 20). Does not affect inbox or announcements.
districtYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv3.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. Addedv2.8.3

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds valuable behavioral nuance: listing normally does not mark messages as read but some district configs may update read-tracking. It also discloses partial failure behavior, per-section error fields, and that limit only caps prism notifications. This goes well beyond the annotation alone.

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?

The description is dense but efficient: scope, source breakdown, response shape, error behavior, limit semantics, read-tracking caveat, and alternative tool are all covered in three sentences. There is no filler or repetition of schema details.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With no output schema, the description appropriately explains section counts/items, error-field behavior, and content types including newMessage/actionRequired flags. It also names ic_get_message for full bodies. It stops short of enumerating item-level fields, but the schema's full/compact view explanation partially covers that.

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 descriptions already cover view and limit in detail; the description reinforces that limit applies only to prism notifications and calls it the high-volume source. However, the required district parameter has no description in either schema or description, leaving a meaningful gap at 67% schema coverage.

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 opens with 'List all parent-visible messages' and enumerates exactly three sources: prism notifications, Messenger 2.0 inbox, and portal userNotice announcements. This precise scope clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like ic_list_assignments or ic_list_grades, and it even names ic_get_message as the sibling for full HTML bodies.

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?

It explicitly directs callers to ic_get_message when the full HTML body is needed, and warns that read-tracking may vary by district, which is a meaningful usage caveat. It does not exhaustively enumerate all alternatives, but the message domain is clearly separated from the other list tools.

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