Skip to main content
Glama
zereight

Bithumb MCP Server

post_user_transactions

Retrieve a user's transaction history on Bithumb exchange to track buys, sells, deposits, and withdrawals for specific cryptocurrencies.

Instructions

Get member's transaction completion history (Private)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
searchGbYesSearch type (0: all, 1: buy complete, 2: sell complete, 3: withdrawal processing, 4: deposit, 5: withdrawal complete, 9: KRW deposit)
orderCurrencyYesCryptocurrency symbol (e.g. BTC, ETH)
offsetNoStart index for retrieval (optional)
countNoNumber of transactions to retrieve (optional, default: 20)

Implementation Reference

  • Core handler function implementing the logic to fetch user transaction history via Bithumb's private API.
    public async postUserTransactions(
      searchGb: number,
      orderCurrency: string,
      offset?: number,
      count?: number,
    ): Promise<IPostUserTransactions> {
      const param = {
        searchGb,
        order_currency: orderCurrency,
        offset,
        count,
      };
      const res = <IPostUserTransactions>(
        await this.requestInfo('user_transactions', param)
      );
      return res;
    }
  • src/index.ts:195-207 (registration)
    MCP tool registration defining the name, description, and input schema.
    {
      name: 'post_user_transactions',
      description: 'Get member\'s transaction completion history (Private)',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          searchGb: { type: 'number', enum: [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9], description: 'Search type (0: all, 1: buy complete, 2: sell complete, 3: withdrawal processing, 4: deposit, 5: withdrawal complete, 9: KRW deposit)' },
          orderCurrency: { type: 'string', description: 'Cryptocurrency symbol (e.g. BTC, ETH)' },
          offset: { type: 'number', description: 'Start index for retrieval (optional)' },
          count: { type: 'number', description: 'Number of transactions to retrieve (optional, default: 20)' }
        },
        required: ['searchGb', 'orderCurrency']
      }
  • MCP server handler that routes the tool call to the BithumbApi instance.
    case 'post_user_transactions':
      result = await this.bithumbApi.postUserTransactions(
        args.searchGb as number,
        args.orderCurrency as string,
        args.offset as number | undefined,
        args.count as number | undefined
      );
  • TypeScript interfaces defining the structure of the response data for the tool.
    import { IBithumbResponse } from './bithumb-response.interface.js';
    
    interface IUserTransactions {
      search: string;
      transfer_date: number;
      order_currenecy: string;
      payment_currency: string;
      units: string;
      price: string;
      amount: string;
      fee_currency: string;
      fee: string;
      order_balance: string;
      payment_balance: string;
    }
    
    export interface IPostUserTransactions extends IBithumbResponse {
      data: IUserTransactions[];
    }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool is 'Private', suggesting authentication requirements, but doesn't specify what type of authentication, rate limits, error conditions, or what format the history data returns. For a tool that accesses private user transaction data, this is a significant gap in behavioral context.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence that states the core purpose upfront. The '(Private)' qualifier is appropriately placed. There's no wasted verbiage, though it could potentially benefit from slightly more context given the lack of annotations and sibling tool ambiguity.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given no annotations, no output schema, and multiple sibling tools with potentially overlapping functionality, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'transaction completion history' includes versus other transaction tools, doesn't specify authentication requirements despite the 'Private' hint, and provides no guidance on when to use this versus alternatives. For a private data retrieval tool in a crowded namespace, this is inadequate.

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

Parameters3/5

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 all parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema. It doesn't explain relationships between parameters or provide usage examples. With complete schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the tool's purpose as 'Get member's transaction completion history' with the qualifier '(Private)', indicating it retrieves private user data. It specifies the verb 'Get' and resource 'transaction completion history', but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_transaction_history' or 'post_order_detail', which might have overlapping functionality.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With sibling tools like 'get_transaction_history' and 'post_order_detail' that might handle similar data, there's no indication of when this specific tool is appropriate or what distinguishes it from other transaction-related tools in the server.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/zereight/bithumb-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server