Wicked MCP server

broker_sync_connections

Read-onlyIdempotent

List a user's connected brokerage accounts in a normalized format to review linked accounts; use for connection overviews, not holdings or cash balances.

Instructions

[Broker Sync API] List a user's connected brokerage accounts (normalized).

Use when you want a user's connected brokerage accounts in a normalized shape. Not for holdings (use broker_sync_positions) or cash (use broker_sync_balances).

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_connections"
  }
}

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

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only/idempotent/open-world, but the description adds genuinely new behavior: x402 USDC-on-Base pricing, the API-key bypass, and the fact that an HTTP 402 with decoded price in payment_required is a quote rather than a failure. That payment/error semantics is not derivable from any structured field. It stops short of describing the normalized return shape or any auth/registration prerequisite tied to broker_sync_register_user.

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 purpose, then usage, then behavior — good ordering, and every section carries signal. Minor redundancy between the opening sentence and the 'Use when you want... normalized shape' sentence, which restates the same noun phrase.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should hint at the return shape; 'normalized' is asserted but never unpacked (which account fields, pagination, empty-account behavior). Everything else an agent needs to invoke it correctly — scope, alternatives, payment path, 402 semantics — is present.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the schema itself only says 'Required.' for user_id — it never states that this is a broker-sync user identifier (potentially distinct from a wallet address or registry identity). The description does not compensate for that ambiguity.

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 ('List a user's connected brokerage accounts') with a scope qualifier ('normalized'). The description also names the two nearest siblings (broker_sync_positions, broker_sync_balances) it is not, so an agent can discriminate 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?

Gives an explicit when-to-use clause plus two explicit exclusions routed to alternate tools ('Not for holdings (use broker_sync_positions) or cash (use broker_sync_balances)'). This is the strongest form of sibling routing.

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

Deploy Server