moodle-um

moodle_get_assignment

Fetch one assignment's instructions, attachments, due date, and submission state by course-module ID.

Instructions

Get one assignment: instructions, attachments, due date and submission state.

Args: cmid: course-module id (the id= value in /mod/assign/view.php?id=...).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "cmid": "<cmid>"
    },
    "name": "moodle_get_assignment"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`cmid`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.5.1Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get' implies a read-only operation and the listed return fields tell the agent what to expect, but it says nothing about authentication requirements, behavior for an invalid cmid, or whether submission state includes grade data.

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 purpose sentence is front-loaded and lists return fields efficiently; the Args block is small and earns its place by clarifying the id source. No filler text.

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?

For a single-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, the return contents, and parameter sourcing. It still leaves error/permission behavior and the shape of 'submission state' unspecified, which an agent could need.

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 description coverage is 0% (the schema only says 'Cmid'), so the description must compensate, and it does: it defines cmid as the course-module id and shows exactly where to find it in the Moodle URL. This is a meaningful improvement over the bare integer schema.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Get one assignment') and enumerates what is returned (instructions, attachments, due date, submission state). The word 'one' implicitly contrasts with a list tool, but no sibling is named, so differentiation is only partial.

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?

There is no explicit statement of when to use this versus moodle_list_assignments or moodle_submit_assignment. However, the cmid note ('the `id=` value in /mod/assign/view.php?id=...') gives practical guidance on how to invoke it correctly, which partially compensates.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.