Wicked MCP server

broker_sync_balances

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve read-only, normalized cash and buying power for each connected broker account to check available funds without fetching holdings.

Instructions

[Broker Sync API] Cash & buying power per connected account (normalized).

Use when you want cash and buying power per connected account. Not for holdings (use broker_sync_positions).

Behavior: read-only. Priced via x402 (USDC on Base) or free with WICKEDAPI_API_KEY; with neither, you get HTTP 402 with the decoded price in payment_required (a price quote, not a failure).

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": {
      "user_id": "<user_id>"
    },
    "name": "broker_sync_balances"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`user_id`	Yes	Required.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.1Oct 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds important payment and auth context: x402 USDC on Base, free with WICKEDAPI_API_KEY, and HTTP 402 with payment_required as a quote rather than a failure.

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?

The description is short and front-loads purpose, then usage, then behavioral notes. It has minor redundancy between the first sentence and the 'Use when' sentence, both restating 'cash and buying power per connected account'.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a simple one-parameter read tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage boundaries, alternative routing, and payment behavior. Nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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 schema has 100% description coverage, but the only parameter (user_id) is described merely as 'Required.' The description adds no extra meaning about user_id, so the high schema coverage 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 states a specific resource and metric: cash and buying power per connected account, normalized. It also explicitly distinguishes from broker_sync_positions, so an agent can disambiguate without opening schemas.

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?

It gives an explicit when-to-use statement ('Use when you want cash and buying power per connected account') and an explicit when-not-to-use with the exact alternative ('Not for holdings (use broker_sync_positions)').

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

Deploy Server