Laravel Forge MCP Server (Extended)

create_scheduled_job

Create a scheduled cron job on a Laravel Forge server by providing the server ID, command, cron frequency, and user. Automate recurring tasks without manual intervention.

Instructions

Create a scheduled job (cron) on a server

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "serverId": "<serverId>",
      "command": "<command>",
      "frequency": "<frequency>",
      "user": "<user>"
    },
    "name": "create_scheduled_job"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`user`	Yes	User to run as (e.g., forge)
`command`	Yes	Command to run
`serverId`	Yes	The ID of the server
`frequency`	Yes	Cron frequency (e.g., '* * * * *' or 'hourly')

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Jul 6, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether jobs are immediately scheduled, if there are permission requirements, or consequences like overwriting existing jobs.

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 concise sentence that is front-loaded with key information. It is not verbose, but could potentially include more context without losing conciseness.

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?

With 4 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain what constitutes a scheduled job, what happens after creation, or how to manage it, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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 the schema already explains each parameter. The description adds no extra meaning beyond stating the action, meeting the baseline of 3.

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?

The description clearly states 'Create a scheduled job (cron) on a server', specifying the verb 'Create', the resource 'scheduled job', and the context 'on a server'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_daemon or create_worker.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions, leaving the agent without context for appropriate invocation.

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