kvant-binance-mcp

futures_all_orders

Retrieve historical futures orders for a trading pair. Filter by time range or order ID to paginate results.

Instructions

Get futures order history (requires API key)

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": "futures_all_orders"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Number of orders (default 500, max 1000)
`symbol`	Yes	Trading pair (required)
`endTime`	No	End time in ms
`orderId`	No	Start pagination from this order ID
`startTime`	No	Start time in ms

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 4, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, and the description only mentions an API key requirement. It does not disclose behavioral traits like pagination (implicit from parameters), rate limits, data freshness, or handling of order history. The short text carries the full burden but fails to provide necessary context.

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?

The description is concise with a single sentence. It front-loads the main action. However, it could include a bit more detail without sacrificing brevity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not cover output format, pagination behavior, or error handling. The tool requires more context to be fully usable.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema; it does not explain parameter purpose or provide examples. The schema itself is clear, so no deduction.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves futures order history, using a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('futures order history'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like futures_open_orders (current open orders) by implying historical context.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as futures_open_orders. No exclusions or context provided beyond the note about API key requirement.

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