keycloak_list_authentication_flows

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already communicates that this is a safe read operation, so the description does not need to restate that. It adds useful conceptual context about what authentication flows are, but does not disclose behavior such as response shape, ordering, or whether only top-level flows are returned.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that leads with the action and resource, then uses an em-dash to add clarifying detail. Every part is informative and there is no wasted wording.

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?

For a simple read-only listing operation with one optional parameter, the description covers the essential purpose and gives helpful examples of flow types. The lack of an output schema is mitigated by the straightforward nature of a list operation, though a brief note on returned fields would make it fully complete.

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?

The only parameter, 'realm', is fully documented in the input schema with its default behavior. The description adds no additional parameter-level detail, which is acceptable because schema coverage is 100%.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('authentication flows'), and clarifies what those flows are with concrete examples (browser, direct grant, registration, reset credentials). This makes the tool's purpose distinct from related siblings like keycloak_get_authentication_flow_executions.

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 gives no guidance about when to use this tool versus related alternatives such as keycloak_get_authentication_flow_executions or keycloak_get_realm_flow_bindings. It states what the tool does, but not the conditions or context that should lead an agent to choose it.

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