LaraBench
Server Details
Search Laravel jobs, remote roles, Laravel news, and package releases in real time.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.2/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.
The two tools clearly target distinct content types: jobs vs news. An agent can easily differentiate based on their descriptions.
Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (search_laravel_jobs, search_laravel_news) with identical prefixes and snake_case.
With only 2 tools, the server feels thin for a general Laravel resource server, but it is limited to search actions for a specific domain.
The server covers the basic search needs for jobs and news, but lacks tools for retrieving full details of individual results or performing other actions like filtering or saving.
Available Tools
2 toolssearch_laravel_jobsSearch Laravel jobsARead-onlyInspect
Search recent Laravel jobs indexed by LaraBench. Results are limited to the last 7 days and link to LaraBench job pages.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Maximum number of jobs to return. | |
| query | No | Free-text search across job title, company, and description. | |
| countries | No | Country or remote-region filters. | |
| locations | No | Location text filters. | |
| seniority | No | Seniority filters. | |
| technologies | No | Technology filters such as laravel, vue, inertia, livewire, or react. | |
| salaryMinimum | No | Minimum disclosed salary, in the currency given by salaryCurrency. | |
| salaryCurrency | No | Three-letter currency code (e.g. USD, EUR, GBP) to pair with salaryMinimum. | |
| employmentTypes | No | Employment type filters. | |
| workArrangement | No | Restrict results to a single work arrangement. Defaults to any. |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| asOf | Yes | |
| results | Yes | |
| larabenchUrl | Yes | |
| totalAvailable | Yes | |
| freshnessWindowDays | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: time limit (last 7 days) and linking behavior. Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description productively supplements with the result scope and destination.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two concise sentences that are front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word adds value; no redundant or filler content.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool has an output schema (context signal), the description need not explain return values. It covers source, time constraint, and linking, which is complete for a search tool. Slight deduction for not explicitly mentioning that results are a list of jobs, but output schema likely covers that.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with all parameters described in the input schema. The description does not elaborate on parameter semantics beyond the schema, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool searches 'recent Laravel jobs indexed by LaraBench', specifying the resource (Laravel jobs) and verb (search). It includes constraints like 'last 7 days' and 'link to LaraBench job pages', and is distinct from sibling 'search_laravel_news'.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implicitly indicates usage for searching Laravel jobs but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use vs not use, nor alternative tools. The sibling 'search_laravel_news' is a different domain, but no when/not-when context is given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_laravel_newsSearch Laravel news and releasesARead-onlyInspect
Search recent Laravel ecosystem news and package releases indexed by LaraBench. Results are limited to the last 7 days and link to LaraBench news pages.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Maximum number of items to return. | |
| query | No | Free-text search across article and release titles and summaries. | |
| types | No | Restrict results to articles, package releases, or both. Defaults to both. | |
| topics | No | Topic filters such as laravel, php, vue, jobs, or packages. | |
| channel | No | Release channel to include. stable excludes prereleases, preview returns only prereleases, all returns both. Defaults to stable. | |
| sources | No | News source filters. | |
| packages | No | Composer or npm package filters. | |
| projects | No | Project filters such as laravel, inertia, livewire, filament, or pest. |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| results | Yes | Article and release items are shaped differently; see the type field. |
| generatedAt | Yes | |
| larabenchUrl | Yes | |
| totalAvailable | Yes | |
| freshnessWindowDays | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that results are limited to the last 7 days and link to LaraBench news pages, providing useful behavioral context beyond annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the key action and includes essential constraints. No unnecessary words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given 8 optional parameters and an output schema, the description provides adequate context: domain, source, time range, and output type. The sibling tool is known from context, and with output schema present, no further detail needed.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to add parameter details. The description only loosely relates to time scope (not a parameter). Baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool searches Laravel ecosystem news and package releases, with a time limit of 7 days and source (LaraBench). The sibling tool search_laravel_jobs is for jobs, so this distinguishes itself well.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description mentions results are limited to the last 7 days, providing a clear usage constraint. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus the sibling or 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.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!