clickedu-mcp

mark_homework

Set one student's homework status for a single Clickedu session—fets, no fets, or no demanats—with an optional note and family email. Returns a preview until confirmed.

Instructions

Set ONE student's homework ('Deures') for ONE session: "fets", "no fets" or "no demanats", with an optional homework note, and optionally tick "Enviar correu electrònic" so Clickedu emails the family. Single action only.

Without confirm=True it returns a PREVIEW and changes nothing; call again with confirm=True only after the teacher approves. Every other student's data is replayed unchanged. An empty note keeps the existing homework note.

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": {
      "cgap": "<cgap>",
      "sessio": "<sessio>",
      "alu_id": "<alu_id>"
    },
    "name": "mark_homework"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`cgap`	Yes
`note`	No
`alu_id`	Yes
`sessio`	Yes
`status`	No	no fets
`confirm`	No
`notify_family`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the dry-run default, that other students' data is replayed unchanged, that empty notes preserve existing notes, and that notify_family triggers a real email to the family. Remaining gaps are permission/auth requirements and whether a status change can be undone or corrected afterwards.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and its scope, then the preview/confirm gate, then side-effect guarantees. Nearly every sentence adds information, though the line breaks are ragged and 'Single action only' partly repeats the opening scope statement.

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?

For a 7-parameter mutation with no annotations, the description covers the risky parts an agent must know: preview gating, blast radius, email side effect, and note fallback. An output schema exists so return values need not be described, but the unexplained required parameters are the one real completeness gap.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It supplies the crucial enum values for status, the empty-note semantics for note, and the meaning of confirm and notify_family. However, the three required parameters cgap, alu_id and sessio get no explanation at all, leaving the mandatory identification inputs undocumented.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Set ONE student's homework') and immediately bounds scope: ONE student, ONE session, three enumerated status values. It also distinguishes itself from other mutation siblings with 'Single action only,' so an agent can tell it isn't a bulk operation.

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 gives explicit workflow guidance: without confirm=True it previews, and confirm=True should only follow teacher approval. That is strong precondition instruction. It doesn't name an alternative sibling or state when not to use it, which keeps it short of a 5.

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