SiteCheck Crypto & Finance

Binance spot order book snapshot for one pair: best bid

crypto_binance_orderbook_depth

Read-only

Binance spot order book snapshot for one pair: best bid and ask, spread, USD depth within 1% and 2% of mid price (from the returned levels only), and 24h volume, change and high/low. Up to 100 levels per side. Snapshot only; Binance market data, not a merged multi-exchange book. Takes about 12 s; allow a 30 s timeout. Related tools on this server, for a different need: finance_binance_prices when you need Binance spot last price for one trading pair; crypto_hyperliquid_perps_depth when you need Hyperliquid L1 perpetual market snapshot for one coin: best. Price: $0.002 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not charged.

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": {
      "symbol": "<symbol>"
    },
    "name": "crypto_binance_orderbook_depth"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	Levels per side: 5, 10, 20, 50 or 100 (default 100)
`symbol`	Yes	Binance spot pair, e.g. BTCUSDT, ETHUSDT

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description carries the real behavioral load and does so well: ~12 s latency with a recommended 30 s timeout, snapshot-not-streaming semantics, and the important caveat that depth percentages are computed 'from the returned levels only' (so a small limit changes the depth figure). It also discloses cost ($0.002 per successful call via x402 on Base/Solana/Arc) and that failed calls are not charged.

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 resource and returned fields, then caveats, then latency, then alternatives - a sensible order with no filler sentences. Minor deduction because the alternatives list carries truncated sibling titles ending in 'best.' and 'best bid', which bloat the sentence without adding routing information, and the pricing/timeout details are packed into the same dense block.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value detail is not required; the description still covers the things structured data cannot - latency budget, cost and payment mechanics, single-exchange scope, snapshot-only semantics, and the depth-derivation caveat. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly or to decide against it is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description adds real meaning by stating 'up to 100 levels per side' and, critically, linking the returned-levels caveat to the limit parameter - implying that a smaller limit degrades the reported 1%/2% depth. It does not restate the allowed enum-like values (5/10/20/50/100) or the default, which the schema already covers.

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 - 'Binance spot order book snapshot for one pair' - and enumerates exactly what is returned: best bid/ask, spread, USD depth within 1% and 2% of mid, 24h volume/change/high-low, up to 100 levels per side. It also explicitly bounds scope ('Snapshot only; Binance market data, not a merged multi-exchange book'), which separates it from aggregator-style siblings.

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?

Names two concrete alternatives with the condition that selects them: finance_binance_prices for last price only, and crypto_hyperliquid_perps_depth for Hyperliquid L1 perpetuals. Combined with the 'not a merged multi-exchange book' exclusion, an agent can route between this, a ticker tool, and a perp-depth tool without opening any schema.

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

All SiteCheck Crypto & Finance 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.

Resources

Need Help?