binance-mcp

get_order_book

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch a current snapshot of bid and ask levels for a Binance symbol, with up to 100 price levels per side. Use it to assess market depth and liquidity at a glance.

Instructions

Current order book snapshot for one symbol, up to 100 levels per side. A snapshot, not a stream: it is stale the moment it is returned.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`depth`	No	Price levels per side. Clamped to 100; larger values are silently reduced rather than rejected.
`symbol`	Yes	Trading pair, base asset first, no separator. Case-insensitive; BTC/USDT and btc-usdt both normalise to BTCUSDT.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`asks`	Yes	Ascending by price.
`bids`	Yes	Descending by price.
`symbol`	Yes
`last_update_id`	Yes	Binance sequence id for this snapshot.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnly and idempotent hints, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context: up to 100 levels per side, snapshot semantics, and immediate staleness. This goes beyond the structured annotations and helps the agent avoid misuse.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight sentences with no filler. The core scope is front-loaded and the staleness caveat is immediately useful. Every sentence contributes value.

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?

Given the output schema, input schema, and annotations, the description is complete enough. It covers the key behavioral caveat, limits, and scope, so an agent can select and invoke the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with symbol and depth already well documented. The description reinforces 'one symbol' and level limits but does not add significant new parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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?

Description states a clear verb/resource: 'Current order book snapshot for one symbol'. It distinguishes the order book from siblings like get_ticker and get_klines by naming the exact data object and scope.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description clearly implies when to use it: when a current order book snapshot for a single symbol is needed. It also warns that it is not a stream, which sets expectations, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion scenarios.

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

Deploy Server