Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Educa Navarra

Educa Navarra

by vTanco
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Vista previa: cruzar notas con Educa

educa_preview_grades
Read-only

Generates a preview that matches grades from a file or list to students in Educa’s open gradebook, showing current grades, proposed grades, and warnings before any data is filled.

Instructions

Cruza las notas (de un fichero o pasadas directamente) con la tabla de calificaciones abierta en Educa y devuelve, sin cambiar nada, qué se escribiría: alumno del fichero, alumno de Educa, nota actual, nota nueva y avisos (alumno no encontrado, nombre dudoso, nota fuera de rango o que no existe en el desplegable, campo bloqueado). Devuelve un plan_id para educa_fill_grades.

Los nombres se emparejan sin importar mayúsculas, tildes ni el orden "Apellidos, Nombre" / "Nombre Apellidos". Las coincidencias aproximadas se marcan y no se escriben salvo que se pida.

Enseña siempre el resultado al profesor antes de rellenar.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "educa_preview_grades"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sheetNo
columnNoColumna de Educa donde va la nota, si hay varias editables
gradesNoAlternativa al fichero: [{"student":"García López, Ana","grade":"7"}, ...]
file_pathNoRuta a un .xlsx o .csv con las notas
id_columnNo
name_columnNo
grade_columnNo
response_formatNo'markdown' para leerlo, 'json' para datos estructuradosmarkdown

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations supply readOnlyHint=true and the description corroborates it with 'sin cambiar nada', then adds substantial context beyond them: the exact result fields per row, the warning categories (alumno no encontrado, nombre dudoso, out-of-range or missing grade, locked field), the accent/case/'Apellidos, Nombre' matching rules, and the policy that fuzzy matches are flagged and not written unless requested. It leaves unstated what happens with no sheet open or how long plan_id stays valid.

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?

Front-loads the core action and result shape in the first sentence, then adds matching rules and the teacher-confirmation rule in short, purposeful paragraphs. Dense but no filler; the parenthetical warning list is long yet each item conveys a distinct outcome.

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 an 8-parameter, read-only preview tool with no output schema, the description does the heavy lifting by enumerating returned fields and warning types. Remaining gaps are edge-case behavior (no open sheet, plan_id lifetime, per-parameter meaning for the four column/sheet args).

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 50%, so several parameters (sheet, id_column, name_column, grade_column, response_format) are undocumented in both places. The description does clarify the file_path-versus-grades alternative ('de un fichero o pasadas directamente') and gestures at column selection via 'campo bloqueado' and out-of-range notes, but that only partially compensates for the gap.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: cross-check grades from a file or inline list against the grade sheet currently open in Educa, and return a preview without writing. The 'sin cambiar nada' phrasing plus the plan_id hand-off makes clear it is the dry-run counterpart of educa_fill_grades, separable from siblings on name and text alone.

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?

Gives a clear workflow rule ('Enseña siempre el resultado al profesor antes de rellenar') and points explicitly to educa_fill_grades as the follow-up consumer of plan_id. It does not explicitly state exclusions such as when to prefer educa_read_grade_sheet first, so it stops short of a full when/when-not map.

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