amazing-binance-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

binance_place_otoco_order

Place an entry order that arms a take-profit/stop-loss bracket once filled, automating a full Binance OTOCO bracket in one request.

Instructions

Place a REAL entry that arms a take-profit/stop pair when it fills. Real money.

Calls POST /api/v3/orderList/otoco (SIGNED, IP weight 1, unfilled-order count 3). The working leg (LIMIT or LIMIT_MAKER) rests on the book; once it is fully filled, the two pending legs go on as an OCO pair, so the first of them to trigger cancels the other. Cancelling any leg kills the whole list.

Kill-switch. Refused with Error: … trading is disabled … unless the server runs with BINANCE_ALLOW_TRADING=1.

There is no dry-run for a list; binance_test_order validates one order at a time.

Enforced locally before anything is signed (S2 L3571-L3579):

working_type=LIMIT → working_time_in_force;
per pending leg — LIMIT_MAKER → price; STOP_LOSS / TAKE_PROFIT → stop price and/or trailing delta; STOP_LOSS_LIMIT / TAKE_PROFIT_LIMIT → price, time-in-force, and stop price and/or trailing delta;
when both pending legs are given, the OCO pairing and the price ordering (pending_above price > pending_below price). The last traded price is unknown to this server, so only the relationship between the prices you pass is checked; Binance applies the full above > last traded price > below rule at trigger time.

Binance marks pending_below_type optional; a list without it is really an OTO, so pass both pending legs unless you mean to place an OTO.

When to Use:

The full bracket in one request: entry, target and stop, with nothing armed until the entry fills.

When NOT to Use:

When you already hold the position — the bracket alone is binance_place_oco_order.
For entry plus a single follow-up — binance_place_oto_order.

Returns: A confirmation echoing orderListId, contingencyType, listStatusType, listOrderStatus, listClientOrderId and a ### Legs table of all three legs exactly as Binance reported them (the pending pair shows as PENDING_NEW until the working leg fills).

Examples: params = {"symbol": "BTCUSDT", "working_type": "LIMIT", "working_side": "BUY", "working_price": "60000.00", "working_quantity": "0.001", "working_time_in_force": "GTC", "pending_side": "SELL", "pending_quantity": "0.001", "pending_above_type": "LIMIT_MAKER", "pending_above_price": "66000.00", "pending_below_type": "STOP_LOSS_LIMIT", "pending_below_price": "57000.00", "pending_below_stop_price": "57500.00", "pending_below_time_in_force": "GTC", "list_client_order_id": "full-bracket-001"}

Error Handling:

Error: … trading is disabled … → the kill-switch is off; nothing was sent.
-2010 / -1013 / -1111 are balance, filter and precision failures on any leg.
-2021 means a LIMIT_MAKER leg would have taken liquidity immediately.
A 5xx or a timeout means the execution status is UNKNOWN — query with binance_get_order_list before retrying.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`params`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the generic annotations by disclosing that this is a real-money order, that the kill-switch (BINANCE_ALLOW_TRADING=1) can block it, that cancelling any leg kills the whole list, and that a 5xx/timeout leaves execution status UNKNOWN. It also explains the OCO trigger semantics and the local validation rules, giving the agent a clear picture of side effects and failure modes.

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 every section earns its place. Core purpose is front-loaded, and the rest is structured with clear headers, bolded warnings, bullet lists, and a concrete example. There is no filler or repetition of schema content.

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?

Covers purpose, usage boundaries, return fields, an example, and a full error-handling section including retry guidance. With an output schema present and annotations provided, nothing an agent needs to invoke this tool correctly is missing.

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 input schema already contains detailed per-parameter descriptions, so the tool description doesn't repeat them. It adds valuable cross-parameter semantics: the working leg must rest on the book, the pending legs form an OCO pair, price ordering is only checked relative to each other (last traded price unknown), and pending_below_type is optional but effectively turns the list into an OTO. The example demonstrates correct usage of all key fields.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Place a REAL entry that arms a take-profit/stop pair when it fills.' This distinguishes it from the sibling OCO and OTO tools, and the body explicitly names those siblings as alternatives, so an agent can immediately tell what this tool does and what it does not do.

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?

Has dedicated 'When to Use' and 'When NOT to Use' sections that name the exact alternatives (binance_place_oco_order, binance_place_oto_order) and the conditions that select them. Also explains the lack of a list-level dry-run and points to binance_test_order, leaving no ambiguity about when this tool is appropriate.

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

Deploy Server