Wicked MCP

registry_register_tool

[Wicked Registry] Register a tool you own so it gets real synthetic checks and a live score. Get the exact message to sign from registry_onboarding_message(action=register), sign it with owner_wallet, then call this. This tool never signs.

Use when you own a tool and want it listed and monitored, with your wallet's signature over the registration message. Not for finding tools.

Behavior: writes state upstream (not read-only); needs the credentials or wallet signature noted above where applicable.

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": {
      "name": "<name>",
      "endpoint_url": "<endpoint_url>",
      "protocol": "<protocol>",
      "category": "<category>",
      "description": "<description>",
      "owner_wallet": "<owner_wallet>",
      "signature": "<signature>",
      "timestamp": "<timestamp>"
    },
    "name": "registry_register_tool"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes
`category`	Yes
`protocol`	Yes	"x402", "mcp" or "rest".
`signature`	Yes	0x-prefixed ECDSA signature over the registration message.
`timestamp`	Yes	ISO 8601 timestamp used in the signed message (within an hour of the call).
`schema_url`	No	Optional JSON Schema URL enabling the schema-conformance score.
`description`	Yes
`endpoint_url`	Yes	Live, publicly reachable endpoint.
`owner_wallet`	Yes	0x wallet that signed the registration message.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Adds genuinely useful context beyond annotations: the tool never signs, signing must happen client-side over a message from a sibling tool, and state is written upstream. It does partly restate annotations ('writes state upstream (not read-only)') where readOnlyHint=false already says so, and says nothing about failure modes or what registration returns.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with the purpose and the prerequisite flow in the first two sentences. The trailing 'Behavior:' line is boilerplate that largely repeats the annotations and could be cut.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a 9-parameter write tool with no output schema, the critical signing prerequisite is fully explained. Minor gaps remain: no mention of name uniqueness, category values, endpoint reachability validation, or what a successful registration produces.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

At 67% schema coverage the description still adds meaning the schema can't: that `signature` must be over the message obtained from registry_onboarding_message and produced by `owner_wallet`. It leaves `name`, `category`, `endpoint_url`, `protocol`, and `description` entirely to the schema, which does document most of them.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Register a tool you own') plus the outcome ('real synthetic checks and a live score'), and explicitly excludes the lookup use case with 'Not for finding tools,' which routes the agent away from registry_search_tools/registry_lookup.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives an explicit precondition chain: fetch the message via registry_onboarding_message(action=register), sign it with owner_wallet, then call this tool. It also names the when ('you own a tool and want it listed and monitored') and the when-not ('Not for finding tools').

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

All Wicked MCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.