Servicio de protocolo de contexto modelo para acceder a los datos del mercado de criptomonedas de Binance.
Este servicio MCP permite a los agentes de IA (como Claude, Cursor, Windsurf, etc.) ejecutar llamadas a la API de Binance y obtener datos en tiempo real del mercado de criptomonedas, incluidos precios, gráficos de velas, libros de órdenes y más.
Propósito Puedes preguntar directamente a la IA sobre los últimos precios de criptomonedas, volumen comercial, tendencias de precios y otra información, sin tener que consultar el sitio web de Binance o usar otras herramientas.
Información disponible
A través de este servicio de MCP usted podrá obtener la siguiente información:
Información de precios actuales: obtenga precios en tiempo real para criptomonedas específicas
Datos del libro de órdenes: ver la profundidad de las órdenes de compra y venta
Datos del gráfico de velas: obtenga datos de velas para diferentes períodos de tiempo
Cambios de precios en 24 horas: ver cambios de precios en 24 horas
Historial de operaciones: ver registros de operaciones recientes
Estadísticas de precios: obtenga estadísticas de precios para varias ventanas de tiempo
Related MCP server: Binance Cryptocurrency MCP
Herramienta | Descripción |
| Obtenga el precio actual de la criptomoneda especificada |
| Obtener datos de la cartera de pedidos |
| Obtener lista de operaciones recientes |
| Obtener datos comerciales históricos |
| Obtener lista de operaciones agregadas |
| Obtener datos de la línea K/vela japonesa |
| Obtenga datos de línea K optimizados para la interfaz de usuario |
| Obtenga el precio promedio actual |
| Obtenga estadísticas de cambios de precios de 24 horas |
| Obtenga información del mercado del día de negociación |
| Obtener el ticker del libro de órdenes |
| Obtenga estadísticas de cambio de precios de la ventana móvil |
Instalación global
Utilice npx para ejecutar el servicio MCP:
npx -y @snjyor/binance-mcp@latestEn Cursor IDE:
Vaya a Cursor Settings > MCP
Haga clic en + Add New MCP Service
Rellene el formulario:
Nombre: binance
Tipo: command
Comando: npx -y @snjyor/binance-mcp@latest
Instalación del proyecto
Agregue un archivo .cursor/mcp.json a su proyecto:
{
"mcpServers": {
"binance": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"@snjyor/binance-mcp@latest"
]
}
}
}Uso
Después de la configuración, las herramientas de datos del mercado de Binance estarán disponibles automáticamente para los agentes de Cursor AI:
La herramienta aparecerá en Available Tools en la configuración de MCP
Los agentes lo utilizarán automáticamente cuando sea relevante.
Puedes pedir explícitamente a los agentes que utilicen estas herramientas
{
"mcpServers": {
"binance": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"@snjyor/binance-mcp@latest"
]
}
}
}A continuación se muestran algunos ejemplos de uso:
Consultar el precio de Bitcoin
Please tell me the current price of BitcoinVer el movimiento de precios de Ethereum en 24 horas
How has Ethereum's price changed in the past 24 hours?Obtenga los datos de la línea K de BNB
Show me the daily K-line data for BNB over the last 5 days# Install dependencies
npm install
# Build
npm run build
# Local testing
npm run startPara depurar su servidor, puede utilizar MCP Inspector .
Primero construya el servidor
npm run buildEjecute el siguiente comando en la terminal:
# Start MCP Inspector and server
npx @modelcontextprotocol/inspector node dist/index.js| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| symbol | No | Trading pair symbol, e.g. BTCUSDT | |
| symbols | No | Array of multiple trading pair symbols |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| symbol | Yes | Trading pair symbol, e.g. BTCUSDT | |
| fromId | No | Aggregate trade ID to start from | |
| startTime | No | Start timestamp (milliseconds) | |
| endTime | No | End timestamp (milliseconds) | |
| limit | No | Number of trades to return, default 500, max 1000 |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| symbol | Yes | Trading pair symbol, e.g. BTCUSDT |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| symbol | No | Trading pair symbol, e.g. BTCUSDT | |
| symbols | No | Array of multiple trading pair symbols |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| symbol | Yes | Trading pair symbol, e.g. BTCUSDT | |
| limit | No | Number of trades to return, default 500, max 1000 | |
| fromId | No | Trade ID to start from, default returns the most recent trades |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| symbol | Yes | Trading pair symbol, e.g. BTCUSDT | |
| interval | Yes | K-line interval, e.g. 1m, 3m, 5m, 15m, 30m, 1h, 2h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 1d, 3d, 1w, 1M | |
| startTime | No | Start timestamp (milliseconds) | |
| endTime | No | End timestamp (milliseconds) | |
| timeZone | No | Time zone, default UTC | |
| limit | No | Number of K-lines to return, default 500, max 1000 |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| symbol | Yes | Trading pair symbol, e.g. BTCUSDT | |
| limit | No | Order book depth, default 100, max 5000 |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| symbol | No | Trading pair symbol, e.g. BTCUSDT | |
| symbols | No | Array of multiple trading pair symbols |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| symbol | Yes | Trading pair symbol, e.g. BTCUSDT | |
| limit | No | Number of trades to return, default 500, max 1000 |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| symbol | No | Trading pair symbol, e.g. BTCUSDT | |
| symbols | No | Array of multiple trading pair symbols | |
| windowSize | No | Window size, e.g. 1m, 4h, 1d | |
| type | No | Return data type, FULL or MINI |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| symbol | No | Trading pair symbol, e.g. BTCUSDT | |
| symbols | No | Array of multiple trading pair symbols | |
| timeZone | No | Time zone, default 0 | |
| type | No | Return data type, FULL or MINI |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| symbol | Yes | Trading pair symbol, e.g. BTCUSDT | |
| interval | Yes | K-line interval, e.g. 1m, 3m, 5m, 15m, 30m, 1h, 2h, 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 1d, 3d, 1w, 1M | |
| startTime | No | Start timestamp (milliseconds) | |
| endTime | No | End timestamp (milliseconds) | |
| timeZone | No | Time zone, default UTC | |
| limit | No | Number of K-lines to return, default 500, max 1000 |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
get_24hr_tickerget_aggregate_tradesget_avg_priceget_book_tickerget_historical_tradesget_klinesget_order_bookget_priceget_recent_tradesget_rolling_window_tickerget_trading_day_tickerget_ui_klinesScored across 12 tools
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes focused on different market data aspects (e.g., ticker data, trades, order book, price, klines). However, some potential overlap exists between get_24hr_ticker, get_rolling_window_ticker, and get_trading_day_ticker, which could cause confusion about which specific ticker data is needed.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with 'get_' prefix followed by descriptive snake_case nouns. The naming is highly predictable and uniform throughout the entire tool set.
12 tools is reasonable for a cryptocurrency exchange data server, providing comprehensive market data coverage. It's slightly on the higher side but well-justified for the domain, though some consolidation might be possible (e.g., multiple ticker tools).
The tool set covers extensive market data retrieval (tickers, trades, order book, price, klines) but lacks trading operations (create/cancel orders, account management) and other exchange functionalities. This creates a significant gap for agents needing to perform actual trading actions beyond data observation.
Unlock the power of real-time cryptocurrency data with our Crypto Price Insights MCP server.
Crypto market data for AI agents: live prices, OHLCV, sentiment, indicators and exchanges.
Your agent needs crypto prices it can rely on — spot, ranked market tables, history, OHLC, per-venue tickers, and what is trending right now. **What you can ask for** • "What is the price of these 20 tokens in USD and EUR right now?" • "Give me the top 100 by market cap with 24h and 7d change." • "Chart this coin's price over the last year, hourly." • "Where does this token trade, and at what spread per venue?" • "What is trending on CoinGecko today?" **How to use it** Point any MCP client at https://mcp.aisa.one/crypto-market-data/mcp and sign in with OAuth — there is no key to create or paste. 21 CoinGecko tools: simple price and token price by contract, supported currencies, coin list and detail, ranked markets, history, market charts and ranges, OHLC, per-coin tickers, categories, exchanges and their tickers, token data and charts, and trending. **It is also a door to the rest** The same login reaches 26 sources and 580+ operations. Price the token here, then ask the same agent what X is posting about it — without adding a second server. **What it costs** Finding and inspecting an operation is free. Running one is billed per call at API prices, with no seat and no monthly minimum, and every call takes max_price_usd so an agent cannot overspend by accident. **Where else it reaches** https://mcp.aisa.one/finance/mcp for equities, crypto and prediction markets in one place.
MCP server giving AI agents one-connection access to crypto & DeFi data: DeFi protocol TVL, stableco
