Canvas MCP

get-discussion-posts

Retrieve discussion posts from a Canvas course by providing the course ID, with an optional limit on the number of posts returned.

Instructions

Haal discussie posts op van een vak

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>"
    },
    "name": "get-discussion-posts"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`courseId`	Yes	Het ID van het vak
`limit`	No	Maximaal aantal discussies (standaard 10)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jun 20, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but does not disclose behavioral traits like pagination, ordering, or side effects. It only states what it does, not how it behaves.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence, which is concise but may be too brief for non-Dutch speakers. It is front-loaded but lacks additional structure or explanation.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema and a simple tool, the description is minimally functional but fails to clarify what kind of posts are returned (e.g., threaded, sorted). It leaves gaps for new users.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline of 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?

The description clearly states that the tool retrieves discussion posts for a course, using a specific verb ('haal op' = get) and resource ('discussie posts van een vak'). It is distinct from siblings as no other discussion-specific tool exists.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs. alternatives, such as prerequisites or context. The description lacks any when-to-use or when-not-to-use information.

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