POSTECH PLMS MCP

plms_list_assignments

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve assignments for a course, including closing times, submission confirmations, and raw grade columns, to track deadlines and completion status.

Instructions

List assignments with stated closing times, submission confirmation and raw grade columns.

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": {
      "course_id": "<course_id>"
    },
    "name": "plms_list_assignments"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`course_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 20, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only a hint about returned columns (redundant with the output schema) and says nothing about pagination, ordering, or auth requirements.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the key resource and returned fields appear immediately. It is arguably slightly too terse, but nothing is wasted.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained, yet the description still repeats output columns instead of covering gaps like paging, ordering, or how course_id scoping works. Adequate but with clear omissions for a list tool operating in an open-world context.

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 description coverage is 0% and the single required parameter course_id is never mentioned in the description. However, a lone integer named course_id is largely self-explanatory, so the description neither strongly compensates nor badly misleads. Baseline for a single obvious param is a 3.

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?

States a specific verb ("List") and resource ("assignments") and even enumerates the columns returned (closing times, submission confirmation, raw grades). It is distinguishable from the singular plms_get_assignment, though it never names siblings or scope (course-level) explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The agent must infer that this is the bulk-listing counterpart to plms_get_assignment and is distinct from plms_upcoming_deadlines, but nothing in the text says so.

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