Binance.US MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the action is a cancellation, implying a destructive write operation, but does not disclose behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, error conditions, or what happens upon success. The description adds minimal context beyond the basic action.

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 two concise sentences with zero waste. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second adds crucial scope information. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded.

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 complexity of a financial trading cancellation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimal. It covers the basic purpose and scope but lacks details on behavior, output, or error handling. It is adequate but has clear gaps for a mutation tool in this context.

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%, so the schema already documents all 5 parameters thoroughly. The description does not add any meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining parameter interactions or examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 specific action ('Cancel an entire OCO order') and the resource ('on Binance.US'), with the second sentence explaining the scope ('Cancelling any individual leg will cancel the entire OCO'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'binance_us_cancel_order' which cancels single orders, not OCO orders.

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?

The description implies usage for OCO orders, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'binance_us_cancel_all_open_orders' or 'binance_us_cancel_order'. It mentions the effect of cancellation but lacks guidance on prerequisites or context.

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