Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-keycloak

mcp-keycloak

by dockndevai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

List realm roles

list_realm_roles
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve all realm-level roles defined in a Keycloak realm to inspect permissions and manage access. Provide a realm name to get the roles assigned at the realm level.

Instructions

List the realm-level roles defined in a realm.

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": {
      "realm": "<realm>"
    },
    "name": "list_realm_roles"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
realmYesRealm name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.2.2
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds only the scoping phrase 'defined in a realm' and says nothing about return size, ordering, or pagination, so it contributes little beyond the structured fields.

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?

A single lean sentence with the resource front-loaded after the verb and no filler. It is efficient, though bordering on under-specified rather than tightly packaged information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple single-parameter list tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the definition is minimally viable. It omits whether the result is filtered, sorted, or paginated, which an agent might reasonably want to know before listing.

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?

Only one parameter, and schema description coverage is 100% ('Realm name'), so the schema fully documents it. Baseline 3 applies; the description adds no format, casing, or defaulting detail beyond that.

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?

Names a specific verb (List) and resource (realm-level roles), scoped to a realm. It is distinguishable from list_users/list_groups/list_clients by resource noun, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with any sibling.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus alternatives such as get_user or list_users, nor any condition or prerequisite. The realm parameter is required but nothing tells the agent when this listing is the right choice.

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