itu-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

OBS Course Grades

obs_get_course_grades

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve official OBS midterm and letter grades for an İTÜ course by class ID, course code, or semester. Use this authoritative record when you need final grades rather than LMS-entered grades.

Instructions

Read the official midterm and/or letter grades for an OBS class (by sinifId or course code) — the authoritative record. For grades as entered in the Ninova LMS by the instructor, which can differ before the official record is updated, use get_course_grades instead.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`course`	No
`class_id`	No
`semester`	No
`include_letter`	No
`include_midterms`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv1.2.1Oct 14, 2026

removedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -true
```

addedOutput schema / properties

Added value: +{
+  "result": {
+    "additionalProperties": true,
+    "title": "Result",
+    "type": "object"
+  }
+}

addedOutput schema / required
```
Added value: +[
+  "result"
+]
```

changedOutput schema / title

Previous value: -"obs_get_course_gradesDictOutput"New value: +"obs_get_course_gradesOutput"

First observedv0.2.0Jul 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so the safety bar is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context the annotations cannot: that this is the authoritative record and that the LMS sibling may show divergent provisional values. It does not mention authentication requirements or any caching/refresh behavior.

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 dense sentences with no filler; the authoritative-record claim is front-loaded and the alternative-tool pointer is placed where it is needed. Every clause carries information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the authoritative-vs-provisional distinction is well covered. The remaining gap is that with 0 required parameters the description never says what the default scope is when course/class_id/semester are omitted, which an agent needs in order to call this unambiguously.

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 0% across 5 parameters, so the description must carry the load and only partly does: it maps the identifier inputs ('by sinifId or course code') onto class_id/course and its 'midterm and/or letter' phrasing hints at the two boolean toggles. The semester parameter and the fact that all parameters are optional (and what happens if none is given) go unexplained.

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 ('read the official midterm and/or letter grades for an OBS class') and immediately establishes it as the authoritative record. It also names the exact sibling it must be distinguished from (get_course_grades) and the axis of difference, so an agent can route without opening either schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit when-to-use and when-to-prefer-the-alternative: use this for the official OBS record, use get_course_grades for instructor-entered Ninova LMS grades that may differ before the official record updates. This is a precise routing rule, not an implied one.

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

Deploy Server