LearningSuite MCP Server

learningsuite_get_course_modules_for_member

Retrieve all modules for a specific course and member, including visibility details to determine which modules are accessible.

Instructions

Get all modules of a course with visibility info for a member

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": {
      "courseId": "<courseId>",
      "memberId": "<memberId>"
    },
    "name": "learningsuite_get_course_modules_for_member"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`courseId`	Yes	Course ID
`memberId`	Yes	Member ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description bears the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly signals a read-only operation ('Get') and mentions the visibility info, but it does not disclose potential caveats such as whether modules are filtered or if all modules are returned with visibility flags.

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 a single sentence, front-loaded with the action and object, and contains no redundant phrases. Every word earns its place.

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 simple two-parameter read tool, the description is mostly adequate but lacks explicit details about the return structure beyond 'visibility info'. It does not clarify whether 'all modules' includes all regardless of visibility, and no output schema exists to clarify. Still, it is generally complete for basic usage.

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?

Both parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the description does not need to elaborate. The tool description adds no further meaning beyond what the schema already provides, and the schema descriptions are minimal ('Course ID', 'Member ID').

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 the tool retrieves all modules of a course with member-specific visibility info, using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like `get_course_modules`, which lacks the member visibility aspect.

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?

No explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison with alternatives is provided. The tool name and description imply its use case, but there is no mention of when to choose this over `get_course_modules` or other member-focused tools.

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

Deploy Server