Carl Jung associated his archetype of the trickster with the Fool in Tarot, although I don't understand how he saw the two archetypes corresponding.
The Fool is the card 0 is the deck, which means he has barely begun his journey through the Major Arcana. In his innocence and empty-headedness, he is mean to represent us before we've done any work on ourselves. Some readers also put him at the back of the deck because after we've gotten the World card, the last card in the Major Arcana, he is full of knowledge and experience, but just as light, because he's learned how to let go of his worldly attachments. Because I have yet to read for an enlightened person, I never get the latter meaning. Rather, I see him as representing innocence, forgetfulness, not knowing how to do something, letting something go before it's processed (like dropping an issue before resolving it out of mindlessness or carelessness, or just not caring), or letting something go because it is processed, like moving on, or not worrying about something.
I also get it in contexts that don't make sense, so I'm still learning how to interpret it, but deviousness associated with the Trickster don't make sense. The Fool is about fullness or emptiness of knowledge, not twisting things so people trip on themselves.
The Trickster, according to Jung, "turns the tables on the high and mighty, [he's] the Joke-player, the source of reversals and consequently the source of transformation and change. Associated with theivery, with upsets, with foolishness and inanity of every hue, the Trickster of American Indian mythology has its archetypal counterpart in Hermes of Greek mythology, the thief, the sweet talker, the fleet-of-foot" [Source].
Jung makes it seem like the Trickster is an element outside ourselves. Jungian writer Robert Hopke wrote,
Tarot decks and ordinary playing cards both preserve the figure of the Trickster in the card of the Fool or the Joker, the wild card of human existence, who can play any role, high to low, with the power to reverse and change the direction of our journey. Thus, this figure is greeted with delight and anxiety, powerful when on our side, baffling when not, an untrustworthy but altogether necessary part of our humanity.
Good grief, either us Tarot readers are missing something important, or Jung didn't think Tarot was worthy the dignity of research.
I mean, we can trick ourselves, so if Jung is saying our own self-flattering ego tricks us into embarassing us, he's associating the trickster qualities with part of our own ego structure. But in that case, I'd see the Fool in the card as the part of us who's the innocent victim who got tricked. He doesn't have the wherewithall to come up with any mischief because, I mean, look at him- he's so empty-headed, it looks like he's going to walk off a cliff with his lack of knowledge.