Skip to main content
Glama
brynj-digital

laravel-forge-readonly-mcp

by brynj-digital
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

List Backup Configurations

list_backup_configs
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check whether a Laravel Forge server is actually backed up by listing its database backup configurations, including schedule, retention, destination, and covered databases.

Instructions

Database backup configurations on a server — schedule, retention, destination and which databases are covered. Answers "is this server actually being backed up?". Listing individual backup INSTANCES needs the server:create-backups scope, which also grants restore, so it is not exposed here.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sortNoComma-separated fields to sort by; prefix with "-" to reverse (e.g. "-created_at").
cursorNoPagination cursor from a previous response's meta.next_cursor.
filterNoField filters, e.g. {"name": "acme-web"}. Supported fields vary by endpoint.
serverYesServer id from list_servers.
includeNoComma-separated relationships to embed (e.g. "tags,latestDeployment").
page_sizeNoItems per page, at most 30. Forge caps pages at 30 and silently returns 30 for anything larger, so read the "page" line and follow the cursor.
organizationNoOrganisation slug. Optional when the server has a default configured.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.3.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / page_size / description
      Previous value: -"Items per page (Forge default 30)."New value: +"Items per page, at most 30. Forge caps pages at 30 and silently returns 30 for anything larger, so read the \"page\" line and follow the cursor."
    • changedInput schema / properties / page_size / maximum
      Previous value: -100New value: +30
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld), so this adds a genuinely new behavioral trait: the scope restriction on instance-level listing and why it is deliberately omitted. It doesn't disclose pagination limits or permission requirements for this endpoint, but the auth-scoping note is real value beyond the annotations.

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?

Three tight sentences: what it returns first, then the practical question it answers, then the scope caveat. No filler, and the most decision-relevant content is front-loaded.

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?

With no output schema, the description helpfully enumerates the returned fields (schedule, retention, destination, databases covered), and all 7 parameters are covered by the schema. It is essentially complete, missing only pagination behavior, which the schema's cursor/page_size descriptions already handle.

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 every parameter is fully documented in the schema and the description adds no syntax or filter semantics of its own. The baseline of 3 applies since the structured data does all the parameter work.

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 (list) and resource (backup configurations) and enumerates the salient fields returned — schedule, retention, destination, covered databases. It also distinguishes itself from the un-exposed instance-level listing, so an agent knows exactly which layer of backups this exposes.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Provides a concrete use case ("is this server actually being backed up?") and explicitly notes the alternative route (individual backup instances) is not available here because it needs the create-backups scope. No sibling in the toolset competes, so the guidance is clear, though it does not spell out prerequisites for this call itself.

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