Retrieves order book depth data for a specified trading pair, with an optional limit to control returned price levels. Use it to inspect market liquidity and bid/ask distribution.
Get order book depth data for a specific trading pair.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Depth of the order book. Default 100; max 5000. | |
| symbol | Yes | Symbol of the trading pair (e.g., BTCUSDT) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It merely restates the tool's function without disclosing behavioral traits such as read-only nature, response format, or any rate limit implications.
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, focused sentence with no extraneous words. It is efficient and front-loaded with the core action.
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?
With no output schema and no annotations, the description does not explain the return structure (e.g., bids/asks arrays) or any ordering conventions. It is minimally sufficient but leaves gaps for an agent to know what to expect.
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%, and the description adds no additional parameter information. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema already documents both 'symbol' and 'limit' with details.
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 action ('Get'), the resource ('order book depth data'), and the scope ('for a specific trading pair'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like BinanceTickerBookTicker (best bid/ask) and BinanceKlines (candlestick data).
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention related tools or scenarios where this should be preferred over other market data endpoints.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.