Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
vishalsachdev

Canvas MCP Server

by vishalsachdev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Associate Rubric

associate_rubric
Destructive

Associates an existing rubric with a Canvas assignment, enabling grading or bookmarking. Specify course, rubric, and assignment IDs to link them.

Instructions

Associate an existing rubric with an assignment.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
purposeNoAssociation purpose: grading, bookmark (default: grading)grading
rubric_idYesID of the rubric to associate
assignment_idYesID of the assignment to associate with
use_for_gradingNoUse rubric for grade calculation (default: False)
course_identifierYesCourse code or Canvas ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.10.0
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "result": {
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "result"
-  ],
-  "type": "object",
-  "x-fastmcp-wrap-result": true
-}New value: +null
  2. Changed15 schema fields changedv1.8.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • addedInput schema / properties / assignment_id / description
      Added value: +"ID of the assignment to associate with"
    • removedInput schema / properties / assignment_id / title
      Removed value: -"Assignment Id"
    • addedInput schema / properties / course_identifier / description
      Added value: +"Course code or Canvas ID"
    • removedInput schema / properties / course_identifier / title
      Removed value: -"Course Identifier"
    • addedInput schema / properties / purpose / description
      Added value: +"Association purpose: grading, bookmark (default: grading)"
    • removedInput schema / properties / purpose / title
      Removed value: -"Purpose"
    • addedInput schema / properties / rubric_id / description
      Added value: +"ID of the rubric to associate"
    • removedInput schema / properties / rubric_id / title
      Removed value: -"Rubric Id"
    • addedInput schema / properties / use_for_grading / description
      Added value: +"Use rubric for grade calculation (default: False)"
    • removedInput schema / properties / use_for_grading / title
      Removed value: -"Use For Grading"
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"associate_rubricArguments"
    • removedOutput schema / properties / result / title
      Removed value: -"Result"
    • removedOutput schema / title
      Removed value: -"associate_rubricOutput"
    • addedOutput schema / x-fastmcp-wrap-result
      Added value: +true
  3. Addedv1.3.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, but the description does not disclose what is destructive about the operation, whether an existing rubric association is replaced, or what permissions are required. With annotations covering only the safety signals, the description adds essentially no behavioral context for a high-stakes mutation.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is efficient, though its brevity contributes to gaps in usage and behavioral guidance rather than being a structural flaw.

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?

For a five-parameter destructive mutation with no output schema and only minimal annotations, the description is too thin. It omits prerequisites, the effect of associating an already-associated rubric, and the interaction between purpose and use_for_grading, leaving the agent under-informed.

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 100%, so all five parameters, including purpose and use_for_grading, are already documented in the schema. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable at the baseline for fully described parameters.

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 states a clear verb and resource: associating an existing rubric with an assignment. It is specific enough to distinguish this from rubric creation or retrieval, but it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings such as create_rubric, update_rubric, or list_rubrics.

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?

The description offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_rubric or update_rubric. It says 'existing rubric', which implies the rubric must already exist, but it does not state prerequisites, when association is appropriate, or what happens if an association already exists.

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