Which integrations are available for this server?

Provides tools for listing courses, searching classwork, finding assessments, and browsing Google Classroom content via browser automation. Allows reading attached Google Docs documents within Classroom assessments and posts.

How do I use Classroom Browser MCP?

1. Click on "Install Server". 2. Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state. 3. In the chat, type @ followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@Classroom Browser MCP find assessment task 4 in my class" That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed. Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.

Classroom Browser MCP

by tirbofish

Overview Schema Related Servers Score Discussions

TypeScript

Local

Classroom Browser MCP

A local, read-only MCP server for Google Classroom accounts that cannot grant OAuth access to the official Classroom API. It automates the same Classroom web pages you can already open and stores the browser session only in a dedicated local profile.

This is specifically for users who cannot use Google Cloud Platform (for any reason) or use their google account to sign in to unauthorised services (specifically students under DETNSW).

What it exposes

classroom_auth_status
classroom_find_assessment - searches Classwork and Stream posts, expands matching items, and reads attached PDFs/Google Docs
classroom_search_activity - searches posts and Classwork, expands comments, and distinguishes direct teacher replies from related teacher-posted resources
classroom_list_courses
classroom_list_classwork
classroom_get_classwork
classroom_search_classwork

There are deliberately no submission, comment, upload, or deletion tools.

Related MCP server: mcp-classroom

Setup

npm install
npm run login

An Edge window opens. Sign in with the school account, verify Classroom loads, and close the window. Then build the server:

npm run build
npm run verify
npm run verify -- "Assessment Task 4 Advanced"

Add it to an MCP client using this command (replace the path if needed):

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "google-classroom": {
      "command": "node",
      "args": ["D:\\classroom-mcp\\dist\\server.js"]
    }
  }
}

Configuration

Environment variables are optional:

Variable	Default	Purpose
`CLASSROOM_PROFILE_DIR`	`~/.classroom-browser-mcp`	Dedicated browser profile location
`CLASSROOM_BROWSER_CHANNEL`	`msedge`	Playwright browser channel, such as `chrome` or `msedge`
`CLASSROOM_BROWSER_EXECUTABLE`	unset	Exact browser executable path; overrides the channel
`CLASSROOM_LOCALE`	`en-AU`	Browser locale

Limits and privacy

This is UI automation, not an undocumented Google API. It can break when Classroom changes its page structure, and your school's policies still apply. The browser profile contains session cookies, so keep it private. Credentials are entered directly into Google's page and are never read or stored by this project.

MCP calls are always headless. Only npm run login opens a visible window for the one-time Google sign-in.

Only use it with an account and coursework you are authorized to access. If the school explicitly forbids browser automation, do not use it without permission.

Available Tools

7 tools

classroom_auth_statusB

Check whether the dedicated local browser profile is signed into Google Classroom.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No parameters

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the purpose, omitting details like whether the check is read-only, has side effects, requires specific auth, or what a signed-out state implies.

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, clear sentence with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded and efficiently conveys the tool's purpose.

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 the absence of an output schema, the description should indicate what the tool returns (e.g., boolean true/false). It fails to do so, making it incomplete for agent invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

There are no parameters, and the schema coverage is 100%. The description doesn't need to add parameter detail. Baseline for zero parameters is 4.

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 verb 'Check' and the specific resource 'whether the dedicated local browser profile is signed into Google Classroom'. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like classroom_list_courses, which deal with classwork and courses.

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 versus its siblings or alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, use cases, or when not to use it, leaving the agent without contextual decision support.

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

classroom_find_assessmentA

Find an assessment task across course Classwork and Stream posts, expand matching items, and return due-date evidence, submission requirements, attachments, and extracted PDF/Google Doc text. Use this for questions like 'when is task X due and what do I submit?'.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`courseHint`	No	Optional subject, class, or course name
`maxCourses`	No
`maxResults`	No
`assessmentTask`	Yes	Assessment name or identifying words
`readAttachments`	No

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description discloses output behavior: returns due-date evidence, submission requirements, attachments, and extracted PDF/Google Doc text. It implies a read-only operation, though it does not explicitly state non-destructive or authentication needs.

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 well-structured sentences: first defines the action and output, second provides a typical use case. No extraneous information.

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?

Describes outputs (due-date evidence, attachments, extracted text) but does not specify return structure, error handling, or what happens if no assessment is found. Given no output schema, more detail on return format would be beneficial.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 40% (2 of 5 parameters have descriptions). The description does not add meaning to any parameters beyond what the schema provides, failing to compensate for the low coverage.

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?

Description clearly states the tool finds assessment tasks across Classwork and Stream posts, expanding matching items and returning detailed evidence. It uses specific verb 'find' and resource 'assessment task', and distinguishes from siblings like 'classroom_search_classwork' by focusing on assessments and returning extracted text.

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?

Provides a concrete usage example: 'Use this for questions like 'when is task X due and what do I submit?''. This gives context but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives among sibling tools.

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

classroom_get_classworkC

Read the visible text and attachment links from one Classroom assignment.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`itemId`	Yes	Classwork id returned by classroom_list_classwork
`itemUrl`	No	Exact URL returned by classroom_list_classwork; recommended for materials
`courseId`	Yes	Course id returned by classroom_list_courses

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It implies read-only but doesn't disclose authentication needs, error behavior, or what 'visible text' means. Does not describe response structure or limitations.

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?

Single sentence, 10 words, clear and front-loaded. Efficient, but could be slightly expanded with usage context without losing conciseness.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, description is insufficient. It doesn't explain return structure, error conditions, or prerequisites (beyond parameters). Agent cannot fully anticipate tool behavior.

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%, and descriptions already explain parameter origins (e.g., returned by list tools). Description adds no new meaning beyond schema, meeting baseline for high coverage.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'read', resource 'one Classroom assignment', and specifies what is read ('visible text and attachment links'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list and search, though could be more explicit.

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 on when to use this tool versus siblings. For example, it doesn't say to use after listing to get details of a specific assignment. Lacks context for appropriate use.

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

classroom_list_classworkB

List assignments, questions, and materials from a course's Classwork page.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`courseId`	Yes	Course id returned by classroom_list_courses

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Indicates read-only listing but lacks details on pagination (limit parameter), ordering, or result set characteristics.

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?

Single sentence, efficient and directly states action. Could be slightly expanded without losing conciseness.

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?

No output schema, no annotation, and minimal description leave gaps. Fails to explain return format, pagination behavior, or how to handle large lists.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 50% (only courseId described). Description adds no meaning to limit parameter; its purpose (pagination) is not explained. Baseline 3 with low coverage not compensated.

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?

Description uses clear verb 'List' and specifies resources 'assignments, questions, and materials' from a course's Classwork page. Differentiates from siblings like 'get' and 'search' but doesn't explicitly contrast them.

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?

Implied usage: list all classwork items for a course. No explicit guidance on when to use this vs 'search' or 'get' variants, nor when not to use it.

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

classroom_list_coursesA

List the Google Classroom courses visible to the signed-in student.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No parameters

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It states it lists courses visible to the signed-in student, implying a read-only operation, but does not mention authentication requirements, response format, or any side effects.

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 with no extraneous information, front-loading the action and resource.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description should add more context about what is returned (e.g., course IDs, names). It is minimally adequate but lacks completeness.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

There are no input parameters, so the description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema. This is a perfect score given the vacuous parameter set.

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 verb 'List' and resource 'Google Classroom courses', with scope 'visible to the signed-in student'. It directly differentiates from sibling tool classroom_list_classwork which lists classwork, not courses.

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?

The description implies usage when a student wants to see their visible courses. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives, but the context of zero parameters and specific scope is clear.

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

classroom_search_activityA

Search course Stream posts and Classwork, expand matching comment threads, identify direct teacher replies, and return related teacher-posted materials or assignments. Use for questions about whether a teacher replied to a post or responded by uploading requested resources.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`query`	Yes	Words from the post, question, resource, or topic
`courseId`	No	Exact course id when already known
`courseHint`	No	Course name or subject, such as Physics
`maxCourses`	No
`maxResults`	No
`teacherName`	No	Optional teacher name override
`includeComments`	No

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry full burden. It describes actions like searching, expanding comments, and returning materials, implying read-only behavior. However, it does not explicitly state safety, authentication needs, or potential side effects, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

The description is a single paragraph that front-loads the main purpose and is reasonably concise, though slightly wordy. Every sentence adds value, but it could be tightened.

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?

No output schema is provided, so the description should explain return values. It vaguely states 'return related teacher-posted materials or assignments' but lacks specifics on result structure, pagination, or fields. For a tool with 7 parameters, it is partially complete but has gaps.

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 57% (4 of 7 parameters described). The description adds context about the tool's overall purpose but does not significantly elaborate on individual parameters beyond what the schema provides. It mentions 'expand matching comment threads' relating to includeComments, but overall does not compensate for missing schema descriptions.

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 searches course Stream posts and Classwork, expands comment threads, and identifies teacher replies, with a specific use case. It distinguishes from sibling tool classroom_search_classwork by focusing on teacher replies and related materials.

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 states when to use: 'Use for questions about whether a teacher replied...' Provides clear context and a specific use case, but does not mention when not to use or alternative tools.

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

classroom_search_classworkB

Search visible classwork titles and summaries across courses. This opens each Classwork page and may take several seconds.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes
`maxCourses`	No

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only discloses that the tool opens each Classwork page and may be slow, but it does not mention read-only nature, required permissions, or side effects.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 the tool has 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on return values, error handling, parameter constraints, and behavioral guarantees.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no information about the two parameters (query, maxCourses). The agent cannot infer their meaning or constraints from the description alone.

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 it searches visible classwork titles and summaries across courses, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like classroom_list_classwork and classroom_search_activity.

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?

The description does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It mentions that the tool opens each Classwork page and may take several seconds, implying a performance cost, but it does not compare with alternatives or specify contexts.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

7 tool updatesv0.1.0Jul 27, 2026
- First observedclassroom_auth_status
- First observedclassroom_find_assessment
- First observedclassroom_get_classwork
- First observedclassroom_list_classwork
- First observedclassroom_list_courses
- First observedclassroom_search_activity
- First observedclassroom_search_classwork

Install Server

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: listing courses, checking auth, listing classwork, getting specific classwork, searching classwork titles, finding assessments with details, and searching activity for teacher replies. There is no overlap.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent 'classroom_verb_noun' pattern (e.g., classroom_list_courses, classroom_get_classwork, classroom_search_activity). Naming is predictable and clear.

Tool Count5/5

With 7 tools, the set is well-scoped for a Classroom browsing assistant. Each tool covers a distinct operation without being too few or too many.

Completeness5/5

The tool set provides full coverage for browsing Google Classroom: authentication, course listing, classwork retrieval and search, assessment lookups, and activity search for teacher interactions. No obvious gaps for the stated purpose.

Maintenance

ActivitySlowing

ResponsivenessSyncing

Resources

GitHub Repository

Need Help?

Related Servers

Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.

Looking for Admin?

If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.

Related MCP Connectors

classquill-mcp
io.github.EquateItAu
Read-only MCP server for ClassQuill, a tutoring-business-management platform.
Education & Learning Tools CRM
2
thoughtsOAuth
ai.thoughtbox.api
An MCP server that provides read access to your cloud storage providers, bank accounts and more.
Cloud Storage Finance
2
google-mcp
io.github.matiasbattocchia
Streamable HTTP MCP server for Google Calendar and Sheets with OAuth login.
Calendar Management Cloud Platforms Workplace & Productivity
24
gcal AOAuth
com.mintmcp
A MCP server that works with Google Calendar to manage event listing, reading, and updates.
Calendar Management App Automation
28

Related MCP Servers

Google Classroom MCP Server
Education & Learning Tools Search
faizan45640
A
license
Not graded
quality
D
maintenance
An MCP server that enables AI assistants to access and interact with Google Classroom data, allowing users to view courses, course details, and assignments through natural language commands.
Updated a year ago (2025-07-28 14:58 UTC)
1,305
6
MIT
mcp-classroom
Education & Learning Tools Cloud Storage Browser Automation
Cambar-Solutions
F
license
Not graded
quality
D
maintenance
MCP server for Google Classroom enabling reading assignments, checking submission states, uploading files to Drive, and viewing attachments, with optional Playwright automation for write operations restricted by Workspace admins.
Updated 5 months ago (2026-04-05 17:59 UTC)
-
google-drive-comments-mcp
Cloud Storage Workplace & Productivity
zayansalman
A
license
Not graded
quality
D
maintenance
A focused MCP server for reading comments on Google Drive files — Docs, Sheets, and Slides, with read-only OAuth scope.
Updated 3 months ago (2026-06-09 08:10 UTC)
MIT
mcp-server-canvas-lms
Education & Learning Tools Content Management Systems
javohir73
A
license
A
quality
A
maintenance
Read-only MCP server for Canvas LMS that exposes tools to list courses, assignments, grades, submissions, syllabi, announcements, modules, pages, and files, without any write operations.
Updated 9 days ago (2026-08-28 12:17 UTC)
11
25
1
MIT

Latest Blog Posts

Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 25, 2026.
mcp
Agent Identity
OAuth 2.1
Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an Intern
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 2, 2026.
Agent Identity
MCP Security
OAuth Delegation
Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)
By Om-Shree-0709 on June 30, 2026.
Agentic Ai
Prompt Injection
WebAssembly

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/tirbofish/google-classroom-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server