Set initial leverage for a Binance USDⓈ-M Futures symbol to manage risk and position sizing before opening trades.
Change the initial leverage of a symbol for Binance USDⓈ-M Futures. Critical for risk management and position sizing.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| symbol | Yes | Trading pair symbol (e.g., BTCUSDT, ETHUSDT) | |
| leverage | Yes | Target leverage level (1-125, depends on symbol) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It says nothing about whether this affects only future positions or existing ones, whether changes fail on open positions, permission/auth requirements, or error behavior. "Initial leverage" is the only behavioral hint and is ambiguous.
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?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action. Efficient but the second sentence is somewhat promotional rather than informative.
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?
For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description omits critical context: effect on existing positions, failure conditions, and required permissions. Full behavioral burden is unmet.
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 both parameters including the 1-125 range and symbol examples. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, which is the baseline.
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?
States a specific verb ("Change") and resource ("initial leverage of a symbol") plus the product scope (Binance USDⓈ-M Futures). Clear enough to distinguish from siblings like change-margin-type or modify-position-margin, though it doesn't explicitly name them.
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 phrase "Critical for risk management and position sizing" implies when you'd use it, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives guidance, nor any mention of prerequisites such as an open position or account state.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.