Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
laravel-forge-readonly-mcp

laravel-forge-readonly-mcp

by brynj-digital
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

List Scheduled Jobs

list_scheduled_jobs
Read-onlyIdempotent

List cron and scheduled jobs for a server or a single site to confirm a schedule exists and is firing, showing command, user, frequency and last run state.

Instructions

Cron/scheduled jobs, either for a whole server or for one site. Shows the command, user, frequency and last run state — use it to confirm a schedule exists and is firing.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteNoRestrict to one site; omit for all jobs on the server.
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

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint), so the bar is lower. The description adds genuine behavioral value by enumerating what each entry shows (command, user, frequency, last run state), which compensates for the missing output schema.

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: the scope/resource statement leads, followed by the return contents and the intended use. No filler and nothing important buried.

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 a list tool with no output schema, the description supplies the returned fields, the server/site scoping, and a reason to call it; pagination and sort semantics live in the schema. It is nearly complete, with only the alternative output tool unaddressed.

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% across all 8 parameters, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description's 'whole server or for one site' only echoes the site parameter's own description without adding format or constraint detail. Baseline 3 is correct.

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?

States a specific resource (cron/scheduled jobs) and its scope (whole server or one site), which is enough to distinguish it from get_scheduled_job_output and list_background_processes. It doesn't name a sibling explicitly, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Gives one positive use case — 'use it to confirm a schedule exists and is firing' — but no when-not guidance and no named alternative for retrieving job output or listing other process types. Usage is implied rather than routed.

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