Skip to main content
Glama
brynj-digital

laravel-forge-readonly-mcp

by brynj-digital
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

List Site Certificates

list_certificates
Read-onlyIdempotent

List a site's SSL certificates with type, status, and expiry date to check for expiring certs. Requires the site:meta scope and the server and site ids.

Instructions

A site's SSL certificates with their type, status and expiry — the read to use for certificate-expiry checks. Requires the site:meta scope.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteYesSite id from list_sites.
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 the site is on.
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 declare readOnly, idempotent and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the site:meta scope requirement, which is genuinely useful auth context beyond the annotations, though it doesn't discuss pagination behavior (which the schema itself already handles).

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?

A single tight sentence that front-loads the resource and returned fields before the usage hint and scope requirement. No filler.

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 usefully lists the key returned fields and the auth scope, which is most of what an agent needs. It could say more about pagination, but the schema's page_size/cursor descriptions already carry that.

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 all 8 parameters (including sort, cursor, filter, include, page_size) are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 names a specific resource (a site's SSL certificates) and enumerates the salient returned fields (type, status, expiry). An agent can immediately tell this is the certificate-listing read and not confuse it with generic site or deployment reads among the siblings.

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?

It gives an explicit use case — 'the read to use for certificate-expiry checks' — and states the required site:meta scope. It stops short of naming alternatives or when-not conditions, but the intended context is clear.

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