Skip to main content
Glama
kaushikgunasekaren

canvas-grader-mcp

by kaushikgunasekaren
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

stage_grade

Save proposed grades, rubric scores, and student feedback locally for later review. Nothing posts to Canvas until you approve and send staged results.

Instructions

Save a proposed grade/comment locally (nothing is sent to Canvas). Review with list_staged, send with post_staged_grades.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noteNoExtra line at the end of the student comment (with breakdown)
gradeNoRaw score/grade before any automatic late deduction, e.g. 8.5, '85%', 'A-', 'complete'
excuseNo
rubricNocriterion_id -> {points, comments?, rating_id?}
commentNoFeedback the student will see: what is missing/wrong and how to improve
user_idYes
breakdownNoOne entry per grading category; the grade is computed from it and the comment gets a score breakdown. 'comment' becomes the opening sentence.
course_idYes
rationaleYesPrivate note for the grader: why this grade (not shown to the student)
extra_creditNoExtra credit earned (with breakdown); omit when none
late_penaltyNoManual late penalty (with breakdown), e.g. {points: 5, reason: 'submitted 2 days late'}
assignment_idYes
group_commentNoGroup assignments: send the comment to every member (default yes)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the most important trait: this is a local staging write with no Canvas side effect, requiring a separate post step. It does not address overwrite/re-stage behavior for the same user/assignment, permissions, or idempotency.

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?

Two short sentences, zero waste, with the surprising behavior (local only) front-loaded ahead of the workflow routing.

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 13-parameter grading tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is thin. It never explains what a staged entry contains, how breakdown/grade/extra_credit/late_penalty interact, or what list_staged will show, though the schema descriptions cover much of the field-level semantics.

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 69% and the description adds no parameter-level detail beyond naming 'grade/comment' — precedence between 'grade' and 'breakdown', the auto late deduction vs. manual 'late_penalty', and the effect of 'group_comment' are left entirely to the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does most of the work.

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?

Specific verb (save/stage) plus resource (grade/comment) and a critical scope qualifier: 'nothing is sent to Canvas.' An agent can immediately tell this apart from post_staged_grades without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent through the workflow: review with list_staged, send with post_staged_grades. It names the follow-up alternative and its condition, but offers no when-not-to-use guidance (e.g. post_comment for standalone comments, or that staged grades can be discarded).

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