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 discloses the authentication requirement ('Requires API key with MARKET_DATA permission'), which is useful behavioral context. However, it lacks details on rate limits, response format, pagination, or error handling, leaving gaps for a tool that fetches historical data.

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 states the purpose, and the second adds critical authentication context. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool that fetches historical trades. It covers authentication but misses details on return values, data format, or potential limitations. With 3 parameters and 100% schema coverage, it's adequate but lacks depth for full agent understanding.

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 fully documents parameters like 'symbol', 'limit', and 'fromId'. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific semantics beyond what's in the schema, such as examples or usage tips. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles 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 verb 'Get' and resource 'older historical trades for a trading pair', making the purpose specific and understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'binance_us_recent_trades' by specifying 'older historical trades', though it doesn't explicitly name the sibling for comparison.

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 provides some context with 'Requires API key with MARKET_DATA permission', which implies when to use it based on authentication. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'binance_us_recent_trades' or 'binance_us_agg_trades', leaving usage somewhat implied rather than clearly guided.

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