Asterwise

Maturity Number

asterwise_get_maturity_number

Read-onlyIdempotent

Calculates the Maturity number as the sum of Life Path and Expression numbers, reduced to a single digit or master number. Represents the underlying wish or true desire that surfaces from around age 35 and fully emerges by midlife.

WORKFLOW: BEFORE: RECOMMENDED — asterwise_get_numerology_profile — confirm Life Path and Expression before interpreting their sum. AFTER: None.

INPUT CONTRACT: name — Full legal name as used at birth. Example: 'Arjun Mehta' date — Birth date in YYYY-MM-DD format. Example: '1985-11-12'

DO NOT CONFUSE WITH: asterwise_get_numerology_profile — returns maturity_number as part of the full profile. asterwise_get_personal_cycles — temporal cycles that change annually, not a fixed number.

Full output and error contract: https://docs.asterwise.com/mcp/tools/get-maturity-number/

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "name": "<name>",
      "date": "<date>"
    },
    "name": "asterwise_get_maturity_number"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	Yes	Date in YYYY-MM-DD format.
`name`	Yes	Full legal name as used at birth, all parts; its letters are converted to numerology values.
`response_format`	No	Output format: 'markdown' (default) for a readable report, or 'json' for the raw structured payload.	markdown

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 18, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / name / description

Previous value: -"Person's full name as commonly written; its letters are converted to numerology values."New value: +"Full legal name as used at birth, all parts; its letters are converted to numerology values."

Changed1 schema field changedOct 10, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / name / description

Previous value: -"Person's full name as commonly written; letters are converted to numerology values."New value: +"Person's full name as commonly written; its letters are converted to numerology values."

Changed1 schema field changedSep 7, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / date / description

Previous value: -"Date in YYYY-MM-DD format. Defaults to today when omitted."New value: +"Date in YYYY-MM-DD format."

Changed3 schema fields changedSep 5, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / date / description

Added value: +"Date in YYYY-MM-DD format. Defaults to today when omitted."

addedInput schema / properties / name / description

Added value: +"Person's full name as commonly written; letters are converted to numerology values."

addedInput schema / properties / response_format / description

Added value: +"Output format: 'markdown' (default) for a readable report, or 'json' for the raw structured payload."

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 4, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / response_format / default
```
Added value: +"markdown"
```

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "name",
-  "date",
-  "response_format"
-]New value: +[
+  "name",
+  "date"
+]

AddedMay 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that: it discloses the deterministic dependency on two other numbers and that the prerequisite profile call is recommended before interpreting the sum. It does not cover error behavior inline, deferring to an external docs URL.

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?

Front-loaded with the what and the why, then cleanly sectioned into workflow, input contract, and disambiguation — no sentence is filler. The external 'full output and error contract' URL is of limited use to an agent at call time and is the one slightly wasteful element.

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?

With an output schema present, annotations covering the safety profile, and 100% parameter coverage, the description supplies everything else needed: derivation, prerequisites, and sibling disambiguation. Nothing required for a correct call is missing.

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 all three params are already documented, which sets the baseline at 3. The INPUT CONTRACT restates name and date with an example but omits response_format entirely, and adds no syntax or format meaning beyond what the schema already says.

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 first sentence names a specific verb (calculates), the exact resource (Maturity number), the derivation formula (Life Path + Expression, reduced to a single digit or master number), and the interpretive meaning. An agent can distinguish it from the ~90 sibling numerology/astrology tools without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicit workflow guidance (BEFORE: recommended asterwise_get_numerology_profile to confirm Life Path and Expression; AFTER: None) plus a DO NOT CONFUSE section naming two siblings and why. It stops short of an explicit 'use this instead of X when you only need the number' statement, leaving that inference to the agent.

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

All Asterwise tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?