Binance.US MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: the tool is read-only (implied by 'Get'), uses a fixed 30-day rolling window, and updates daily at 0:00 UTC. However, it doesn't mention authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what the return format looks like.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste: the first states the core purpose and timeframe, the second adds crucial behavioral detail about calculation timing. Every word earns its place, and the most important information is 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?

For a simple read operation with no output schema and minimal parameters, the description covers the essential what and when. However, without annotations or output schema, it should ideally mention authentication needs, rate limits, or return format to be fully complete for API integration.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for its single parameter ('recvWindow'), so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that volume is calculated on a rolling basis daily, which provides context beyond the parameter documentation, though it doesn't directly explain parameter usage.

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 ('Get total trade volume') with precise temporal scope ('for the past 30 days'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'binance_us_ticker_24hr' or 'binance_us_rolling_window' that provide different metrics or timeframes. It explicitly defines what resource is being retrieved.

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 context by specifying the 30-day rolling window and daily calculation timing, which helps differentiate from tools like 'binance_us_ticker_24hr' (24-hour window) or 'binance_us_rolling_window' (customizable window). However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or mention any prerequisites.

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