List / search users

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

The description adds a useful and safety-relevant behavioral guarantee: 'Passwords and secrets are never returned by Keycloak.' This goes beyond the input schema and is especially valuable with no annotations present. However, it does not fully describe other behavioral aspects such as result formatting, sorting, or the effect of pagination defaults.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is three short sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core function, then adds search/pagination support and a valuable security note, all in an efficient and readable structure.

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

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

The input schema documents all parameters fully, and the description provides a key output-relevant guarantee that secrets are never returned. It does not explicitly describe array structure or how results are sorted, but for a simple list/search tool these are likely easily inferable or not critical. Overall, the description is adequately complete for invoking the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters already have individual explanations. The description only restates 'free-text search' and 'pagination' in prose, without adding extra meaning about parameter formats, defaults, or edge cases. A baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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

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

The description states 'List users in a realm' with a specific verb and resource, and 'Supports free-text search and pagination' further clarifies the behavior. This clearly distinguishes list_users from get_user (single user) and count_users (count only) in the sibling list.

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

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

The description implies usage for retrieving or searching multiple users, but it does not explicitly say when to use it versus sibling tools like get_user or count_users. It lacks any stated exclusions, so it stays at implied guidance rather than explicit routing.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.