Skip to main content
Glama
brynj-digital

laravel-forge-readonly-mcp

by brynj-digital
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

List Databases

list_databases
Read-onlyIdempotent

List database schemas or database users and their granted schemas for a Laravel Forge server; names and grants only, never reads database contents.

Instructions

Database schemas on a server, or the database users and the schemas they can access. Names and grants only — this never reads database contents.

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").
resourceNo"schemas" (default) for databases, "users" for database users.
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

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context beyond that: the output is 'names and grants only' and it 'never reads database contents' — important scoping information for an agent deciding whether it can answer a question with this tool.

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?

Two tight sentences with zero filler; the resource scope is front-loaded and the data-access constraint follows immediately. Nothing to trim.

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?

For an 8-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately conveys what is returned (names and grants) and the two output modes. It does not need to explain return values since it already characterizes them, though pagination/filter behavior is left to the schema.

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 baseline is 3. The description's schemas/users distinction loosely maps to the 'resource' enum, but it adds no syntax, defaults, or field-level meaning beyond what the schema already documents for the 8 parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names the resources returned (database schemas, or database users and their accessible schemas) and clearly distinguishes this from siblings like list_servers or list_domains. The verb is implicit from the tool name, but the scope is specific enough that an agent knows what it gets back.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It implicitly covers two usage modes distinguished by the 'resource' parameter (schemas vs users), but offers no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or alternatives among the many sibling list_* tools. Adequate but inferential.

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