Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
vishalsachdev

Canvas MCP Server

by vishalsachdev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Get Peer Review Comments

get_peer_review_comments
Read-only

Retrieve actual peer review comment text for a Canvas assignment, with options to anonymize students and include reviewer, reviewee, or submission context.

Instructions

Retrieve actual comment text for peer reviews on an assignment.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
assignment_idYesCanvas assignment ID
course_identifierYesCourse code or Canvas ID
anonymize_studentsNoReplace names with anonymous IDs
include_reviewee_infoNoInclude reviewee details
include_reviewer_infoNoInclude reviewer details
include_submission_contextNoInclude submission details

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. Changed17 schema fields changedv1.8.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • addedInput schema / properties / anonymize_students / description
      Added value: +"Replace names with anonymous IDs"
    • removedInput schema / properties / anonymize_students / title
      Removed value: -"Anonymize Students"
    • addedInput schema / properties / assignment_id / description
      Added value: +"Canvas assignment ID"
    • 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 / include_reviewee_info / description
      Added value: +"Include reviewee details"
    • removedInput schema / properties / include_reviewee_info / title
      Removed value: -"Include Reviewee Info"
    • addedInput schema / properties / include_reviewer_info / description
      Added value: +"Include reviewer details"
    • removedInput schema / properties / include_reviewer_info / title
      Removed value: -"Include Reviewer Info"
    • addedInput schema / properties / include_submission_context / description
      Added value: +"Include submission details"
    • removedInput schema / properties / include_submission_context / title
      Removed value: -"Include Submission Context"
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"get_peer_review_commentsArguments"
    • removedOutput schema / properties / result / title
      Removed value: -"Result"
    • removedOutput schema / title
      Removed value: -"get_peer_review_commentsOutput"
    • addedOutput schema / x-fastmcp-wrap-result
      Added value: +true
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.0
    • addedInput schema / title
      Added value: +"get_peer_review_commentsArguments"
  4. First observed

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes this as a safe read operation. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond that, not covering permissions, anonymization effects, response shape, or rate limits, but it does not contradict the annotation.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It communicates the core retrieval target efficiently.

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?

Given the rich schema and read-only annotation, the description covers the basic purpose adequately. However, with no output schema, it could say more about the returned comment structure, privacy behavior, or how this differs from related peer review tools.

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%, and all six parameters, including anonymize_students and the include_* flags, are documented in the schema. The description does not add parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb, 'Retrieve,' and a precise resource, 'actual comment text for peer reviews on an assignment.' This clearly distinguishes it from list/analytics-style peer review tools, though it does not explicitly name those siblings.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_peer_reviews, get_peer_review_assignments, or analyze_peer_review_quality. The intended use is only implied by the phrase 'actual comment text.'

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