The OKX MCP Server provides access to real-time cryptocurrency price data from the OKX exchange via a simple interface with robust error handling and logging.
Key capabilities:
Retrieve historical candlestick (OHLCV) data: Fetch candlestick data for any instrument with customizable time intervals and quantities
Fetch latest price and 24-hour market data: Obtain real-time price, bid, ask, and 24-hour high/low/volume for any instrument
Comprehensive error handling: Includes network error capture, invalid instrument ID checks, and API rate limit management
Robust development and deployment: Easy installation, build, and configuration for use with Claude Desktop or VSCode
Handles HTTP requests to the OKX API with timeout configuration for respecting rate limits.
Provides real-time cryptocurrency price data from OKX exchange, including historical candlestick data and latest price information for any instrument traded on the platform.
README.md not found. View project on GitHub.
Get candlestick data for an OKX instrument
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| bar | No | Time interval (e.g. 1m, 5m, 1H, 1D) | 1m |
| instrument | Yes | Instrument ID (e.g. BTC-USDT) | |
| limit | No | Number of candlesticks (max 100) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but only states what the tool does without mentioning rate limits, authentication needs, response format, or pagination behavior. It doesn't explain what 'candlestick data' includes (e.g., OHLC values) or any constraints beyond the implied data retrieval.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for a simple data retrieval tool, with every word contributing to clarity.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool with three parameters. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like response format, error handling, or usage context, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to understand how to effectively invoke and interpret results.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all three parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining the significance of candlestick intervals or instrument IDs in context. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('candlestick data for an OKX instrument'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from the sibling tool 'get_price', which likely provides different market data, leaving room for improvement in distinguishing between similar data retrieval functions.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling 'get_price' or any alternatives. It lacks context about when candlestick data is appropriate (e.g., for charting, technical analysis) versus price data, offering no usage boundaries or prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Get latest price for an OKX instrument
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| instrument | Yes | Instrument ID (e.g. BTC-USDT) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states what the tool does but lacks details on traits like rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or response format. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation coverage.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, efficient sentence with zero waste. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, clearly stating the tool's purpose without unnecessary elaboration.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain behavioral traits, return values, or usage context, which are essential for a tool that fetches financial data. This leaves clear gaps in understanding.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the 'instrument' parameter. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as examples or constraints, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and resource 'latest price for an OKX instrument', making the purpose specific and understandable. It doesn't explicitly distinguish from the sibling 'get_candlesticks', which provides historical price data, so it misses full differentiation.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_candlesticks'. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving usage unclear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0get_candlesticksget_priceScored across 2 tools
The two tools have distinct purposes: get_candlesticks retrieves historical candlestick data, while get_price fetches the latest price. There is minimal overlap as they target different data types (historical vs. current), though both relate to instrument pricing which could cause slight confusion if an agent needs both types of data.
Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with 'get_' prefix and snake_case naming (get_candlesticks, get_price). This uniformity makes the tool set predictable and easy to understand for agents.
With only 2 tools, the server feels under-scoped for a cryptocurrency exchange domain like OKX. Key operations such as placing orders, checking account balances, or managing positions are missing, limiting the server's utility for comprehensive trading or analysis tasks.
The tool set is severely incomplete for an OKX exchange server. It only provides read-only price data without any trading, account management, or market analysis capabilities. This creates significant gaps that will hinder agents from performing typical exchange-related workflows.
Real-time crypto prices from Binance, Coinbase, Kraken, OKX, and Bybit
Real-time crypto market data: candles, tickers, orderbooks across 13+ exchanges via MCP.
Provide real-time cryptocurrency price data and market analysis.
