Laravel Forge MCP Server (Extended)

update_nginx_config

Update Nginx configuration for a Laravel Forge site by providing server and site IDs along with the new configuration content.

Instructions

Update the Nginx configuration for a site

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>",
      "siteId": "<siteId>",
      "content": "<content>"
    },
    "name": "update_nginx_config"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`siteId`	Yes	The ID of the site
`content`	Yes	Nginx configuration content
`serverId`	Yes	The ID of the server

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?

Annotations are absent, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Update' without specifying side effects (e.g., whether Nginx restarts, config validation, or permissions required). This leaves the agent underinformed.

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 single-sentence description is concise and front-loaded with the key action and resource. However, it misses an opportunity to add brief contextual details without increasing length significantly.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, the description lacks details about post-update behavior, prerequisites (e.g., site existence), error conditions, or confirmation steps. It is minimally complete but leaves gaps for an AI 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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for each parameter. The description adds no further meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for adequate parameter semantics.

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 the verb 'Update' and resource 'Nginx configuration for a site', making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_nginx_config' (retrieve only) and 'deploy_site' (broader deployment).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not mention that it should be used alongside 'get_nginx_config' for review, or when a reload/restart is needed after update.

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