Skip to main content
Glama
trustxai

amazing-binance-mcp

by trustxai

binance_get_fiat_payments

Read-onlyIdempotent

List fiat-based crypto buy and sell payments, showing amounts, fees, prices, and status per transaction.

Instructions

List crypto buy/sell payments made with fiat (bank transfer or bank-issued card).

Calls GET /sapi/v1/fiat/payments, signed, IP weight 1 (cheap — unlike fiat/orders). A "Credit Card" paymentMethod here is a bank-issued card buying crypto, and is NOT the Binance Card — Binance Card spend has no API surface at all (.memory/research/03-card-and-gaps.md §1); the closest proxies are binance_get_funding_wallet and binance_get_pay_transactions (walletType 4/6).

When to Use:

  • Seeing crypto bought or sold with fiat: source/obtained amounts, price, fee, payment method (buy only), status.

  • Reconciling a specific purchase by scanning a narrow begin_time/end_time window.

When NOT to Use:

  • Bank deposits/withdrawals of fiat itself — use binance_get_fiat_orders.

  • A long backfill across many pages or months — use binance_get_fiat_history.

Returns: A markdown list (or JSON with response_format="json") of payments: order number, fiat amount/currency, obtained crypto amount/currency, price, fee, payment method (buy only), status, created/updated time. Status values Binance returns: Processing, Failed, Successful, Finished, Refunding, Refunded, Refund Failed, Order Partial credit Stopped.

Pagination: page (1-indexed) / rows (max 500) map directly to the API; the response also reports Binance's own total row count across all pages. Markdown display is capped at 50 rows (with a note naming the next page to request); JSON keeps the full page.

Examples: params = {"transaction_type": "buy", "rows": 50} params = {"transaction_type": "sell", "begin_time": "2026-01-01", "end_time": "2026-02-01"}

Error Handling: A 200 body with success: false is raised by the client as BinanceEnvelopeError and surfaced here as Error: .... A malformed begin_time/end_time returns Error: <field> must be epoch milliseconds or an ISO-8601 string without calling the API.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses the signed endpoint, IP weight, the Credit Card vs Binance Card distinction, the Binance status values, row-capping behavior, and error handling including BinanceEnvelopeError and malformed time errors. This significantly enriches what the annotations alone provide. There is no contradiction with the readOnly/idempotent hints.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is long but highly organized into clear sections: purpose, usage, returns, pagination, examples, and errors. Every section earns its place, and the most important scoping facts are front-loaded. It remains readable despite its detail.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only list endpoint, the description covers the API route, safety signals, when to use it versus alternatives, return shape, pagination semantics, examples, and error behaviors. An agent has everything needed to select, invoke, and interpret this tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already describes parameters thoroughly, including time formats, page/rows bounds, and transaction_type mapping. The description adds practical meaning with examples, the API default of 30 days when begin/end are omitted, the direct page/rows passthrough, and the markdown-vs-JSON row cap. This goes beyond schema coverage without being redundant.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List crypto buy/sell payments made with fiat'. It also differentiates from closely related tools by explicitly saying Credit Card means bank-issued card, not the Binance Card, and distinguishes this endpoint from fiat/orders. An agent can clearly understand what the tool does and how it differs from siblings.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description has explicit 'When to Use' and 'When NOT to Use' sections, naming alternatives such as binance_get_fiat_orders for bank deposits/withdrawals and binance_get_fiat_history for long backfills. It also clarifies narrow time-window reconciliation use. This is strong, actionable routing guidance.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools