keycloak-mcp-server

list-identity-provider-mapper-types

List available mapper types for an identity provider in a Keycloak realm by specifying the realm and alias. Get the supported mapper types to configure identity provider mappings.

Instructions

List available mapper types for an 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": "list-identity-provider-mapper-types"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`alias`	Yes	Identity provider alias
`realm`	Yes	Realm name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0Aug 14, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

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. It only states 'List available mapper types', which doesn't explicitly disclose that the operation is read-only, what the response format is, or any permission requirements. The verb 'list' implies safety, but the description adds no behavioral detail beyond the name.

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 that is front-loaded with the primary action and resource. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 listing tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but lacks guidance on expected output format, pagination, or error conditions. It is sufficient for an agent to understand the basic function, but not rich enough to fully anticipate behavior in complex scenarios.

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?

Both parameters ('alias' and 'realm') are fully described in the input schema (100% coverage). The description itself does not add any parameter-level meaning, but the schema already provides sufficient detail. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema covers all parameters.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' and identifies the resource as 'available mapper types for an identity provider', which is distinct from the sibling tool 'list-identity-provider-mappers' (which lists configured mappers). This clearly conveys the tool's 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 such as 'list-identity-provider-mappers' or 'create-identity-provider-mapper'. It does not mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or typical use cases.

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

Deploy Server