Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
keycloak-mcp-server

keycloak-mcp-server

by thebylito
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

get-identity-provider

Get detailed configuration for an identity provider within a Keycloak realm by specifying its alias.

Instructions

Get details of a specific identity provider

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>",
      "alias": "<alias>"
    },
    "name": "get-identity-provider"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
aliasYesIdentity provider alias
realmYesRealm name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get details' and does not mention response format, error handling (e.g., not found), or any prerequisites, leaving the agent without critical behavioral context beyond the obvious read-only nature of 'get'.

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, concise sentence with no unnecessary words or repetition. It efficiently conveys the core purpose without redundancy.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple get operation with two schema-documented parameters, the description is minimally adequate. However, the absence of an output schema and any detail on return values or error behavior leaves gaps in what the agent can expect from invoking the tool.

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?

The input schema already provides 100% coverage for both parameters with descriptions ('Identity provider alias' and 'Realm name'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already contains, so the baseline score 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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'details of a specific identity provider', which distinguishes it from sibling list, create, update, and delete tools. The specificity of 'details' and 'specific' makes the purpose unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

No explicit when-to-use guidance or alternative tools are mentioned. However, the required parameters (realm and alias) imply this is for targeted lookups, making the usage context reasonably clear by inference.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools