keycloak-mcp-server

delete-client

Remove a client from a Keycloak realm using its client ID. This tool cleans up client configurations by deleting the specified client from the given realm.

Instructions

Remove a client from 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>",
      "clientId": "<clientId>"
    },
    "name": "delete-client"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`realm`	Yes	Realm name
`clientId`	Yes	Client ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0Aug 14, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action but does not communicate that the deletion is permanent, destructive, or any potential side effects on associated data. This is a significant gap for a destructive operation.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It directly conveys the core purpose without fluff, earning its place.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool is a simple delete operation with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but lacks critical behavioral context. With no annotations, it should disclose the destructive nature, reversibility, or error handling, but it does not. This leaves the agent under-informed for a potentially impactful operation.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters (realm and clientId) are already self-explanatory. The description 'from a realm' hints at the realm parameter but adds no new meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description 'Remove a client from a realm' uses a specific verb ('Remove') and resource ('client'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that delete other entities like users or roles. It fully states the action and scope.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The context signals show many sibling delete tools, but no comparison or explicit usage context is offered.

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

Deploy Server