Retrieve candlestick (kline) data for a specified trading pair and interval to analyze price action, build charts, or backtest trading strategies.
Get candlestick data (klines) for a specific trading pair and interval.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Default 500; max 1000 | |
| symbol | Yes | Symbol of the trading pair (e.g., BTCUSDT) | |
| endTime | No | End time in milliseconds | |
| interval | Yes | Kline interval | |
| startTime | No | Start time in milliseconds |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'get' data, but does not mention response format, pagination, time range handling, or any API-specific constraints. This is a significant gap for a data retrieval tool.
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 concise sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the essential verb and object.
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?
Without an output schema, the description fails to explain what the returned candlestick data contains (e.g., OHLCV fields). Sibling differentiation is absent, and the tool has 5 parameters. The description is under-specified for an agent to confidently invoke and interpret results.
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?
The schema description coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds a slight mapping by mentioning 'trading pair' and 'interval', but does not go beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 and resource: 'Get candlestick data (klines) for a specific trading pair and interval.' It is specific enough, but does not distinguish itself from sibling tools like BinanceUiKlines, which likely serves a similar purpose.
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 BinanceUiKlines, BinanceHistoricalTrades, or other market data tools, leaving the agent without context for selecting the correct one.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.