market_timeFetch Binance's server time in millisecond precision for clock synchronization and API signature validation.
获取币安交易所服务器时间（毫秒时间戳），用于时钟同步与签名校验。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| serverTime | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
v3.0.1Input schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "serverTime": {
+ "type": "number"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "serverTime"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}v2.0.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The readOnlyHint annotation already tells the AI the operation is safe and non-mutating. The description adds the precise return type and use-case context, which is useful but modest.
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?
One precise sentence with no filler: it states what is returned, the unit, and the intended purposes. Every phrase carries information.
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 zero-parameter, read-only, server-time tool with an output schema present, the description is complete. An agent knows exactly what to expect and how to use the result.
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?
There are no parameters, and the schema describes this fully with 100% coverage. A clear description is still helpful to mention what the tool actually retrieves.
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 states a specific verb and resource: it fetches Binance server time as a millisecond timestamp. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling trading and market-data tools.
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?
It explicitly gives usage context: clock synchronization and signature verification. It does not name alternatives or exclusion cases, but with zero parameters and a unique purpose, the given context is sufficient.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/iuk-ink/binance-mcp-server'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server