List identity provider mappers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, which sufficiently convey that the tool performs a safe, non-destructive read operation. The description adds no extra behavioral context beyond 'list', so it does not contradict annotations but also does not add value beyond them.

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 concise sentence that is front-loaded with the main purpose. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

Given the simple nature of the tool (list with one parameter) and the coverage of annotations, the description is adequate but minimal. It does not specify what details are returned (e.g., mapper names, types) – an output schema would help, but none is provided. For a list tool, more context about the output format would improve completeness.

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 schema has zero description coverage, and the description does not explain the meaning of the required 'alias' parameter. With 0% coverage, the description must compensate, but it fails to do so, leaving the agent unaware that 'alias' refers to the identity provider's alias.

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 'List an identity provider's mappers' clearly states the action (list) and resource (identity provider mappers). It distinguishes from sibling tools like keycloak_client_mappers_list and keycloak_idp_list by specifying 'identity provider's mappers' rather than client mappers or identity providers themselves.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as keycloak_client_mappers_list or keycloak_idp_list. The description does not indicate prerequisites, when not to use it, or context for using it.

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