Get realm configuration

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

The description restates the readOnlyHint and idempotentHint from annotations and adds behavioral detail: 'takes no parameters' and 'never modifies Keycloak'. This provides context beyond the annotations.

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 consists of two succinct sentences with no redundant information. It is front-loaded with the read-only nature and return type, followed by use case and parameter confirmation.

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 description lists the specific fields returned (realm name, enabled state, flags, SSL requirement, session lifespans) and notes it returns a JSON object. Since there is no output schema, this adequately explains the return structure.

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?

There are no parameters, and the description explicitly states 'takes no parameters', which adds value for a tool with zero parameters. The baseline for no parameters is 4.

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 clearly states it returns a curated subset of the realm's configuration as a JSON object, listing specific fields. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('realm configuration'), and distinguishes from a full realm representation.

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 explicitly states to use this tool for inspecting security-relevant realm settings, implying an alternative (full realm representation) is not needed. It does not explicitly name sibling tools or provide exclusion criteria, but the guidance is clear and sufficient.

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