Find assets in a Binance wallet that can be converted into BNB, helping you decide which holdings to convert for BNB liquidity.
Get assets that can be converted to BNB.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| recvWindow | No | The value cannot be greater than 60000 |
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 must carry the behavioral burden. It only states a read-like action ('Get') but does not mention return format, authentication needs, rate limits, or side effects. The description adds no behavioral context beyond what the name implies.
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 sentence with no filler words. It is concise, front-loaded, and every word contributes to the purpose. There is no unnecessary structure overhead.
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?
Given the lack of output schema and annotations, the description is quite sparse. It does not clarify what 'assets' means (e.g., dust, all spot assets) or explain the response format. While the tool is simple, the description could provide more context about its role in the conversion workflow, especially relative to related sibling tools.
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 single parameter recvWindow is fully described in the schema with a constraint (<=60000), so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.
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 uses the specific verb 'Get' and the resource 'assets that can be converted to BNB', clearly indicating the tool's purpose. It distinguishes from sibling tools like BinanceWalletUserAsset and BinanceWalletDustTransfer by focusing specifically on convertible assets, though it does not explicitly contrast with them.
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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions. The description merely states the function without any contextual hints about when it should be invoked.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.