Asterwise

Numerology Profile

asterwise_get_numerology_profile

Read-onlyIdempotent

Builds a Pythagorean numerology profile from a legal name and birth date and returns core numbers, cycles, lucky digits, and summary copy.

WORKFLOW: BEFORE: None — this tool is standalone. AFTER: asterwise_get_personal_year — fills Personal Year when needed.

INPUT CONTRACT: name and date strings are forwarded without extra local validation; malformed payloads fail upstream.

DO NOT CONFUSE WITH: asterwise_get_chaldean_numerology — Chaldean letter values and compound structure, not Pythagorean cores. asterwise_get_lucky_numbers — lightweight lucky list without the full profile payload.

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

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	Yes	Date in YYYY-MM-DD format. Defaults to today when omitted.
`name`	Yes	Person's full name as commonly written; 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

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

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"
+]

First observedApr 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: name and date strings are forwarded without extra local validation, malformed payloads fail upstream, and the tool is standalone with no prerequisites. A link to the full output and error contract further reduces ambiguity.

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 well-structured and front-loaded: the first sentence states the essence, followed by compact labeled sections for workflow, input contract, and sibling differentiation. Every section adds actionable information, and the documentation link provides a natural extension point without bloating the description.

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 tool with an output schema and rich annotations, the description covers all necessary context: what it produces, how inputs are validated, how it fits in a workflow, which related tools are not to be confused with it, and where to find the full output/error contract. An agent has enough information to invoke it correctly and avoid common routing mistakes.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by stating that name and date strings are forwarded without local validation and that malformed payloads fail upstream, which clarifies how the parameters are handled. It also refers to a 'legal name' and 'birth date' in the purpose sentence, reinforcing the semantic intent of the name and date parameters. The only minor friction is the schema's required date field conflicting with the date's 'defaults to today when omitted' note, but that is an internal schema inconsistency rather than a description gap.

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: 'Builds a Pythagorean numerology profile from a legal name and birth date' and names the exact outputs: core numbers, cycles, lucky digits, and summary copy. The DO NOT CONFUSE WITH section explicitly distinguishes it from chaldean numerology and lucky numbers, so it is clearly differentiated 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 gives explicit routing guidance: it names asterwise_get_chaldean_numerology and asterwise_get_lucky_numbers as alternatives, explains what those tools do differently, and tells the agent not to confuse them with this tool. It also provides workflow sequencing: this tool is standalone before, and asterwise_get_personal_year should be called after when Personal Year is needed.

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

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

Many tools are well-differentiated by explicit 'DO NOT CONFUSE WITH' notes, but the sheer number of near-neighbor pairs (e.g., crystal vs gemstone recommendations, natal chart variants, dasha systems, compatibility systems, tarot draw variants) creates real selection risk. The descriptions mitigate overlap, but an agent browsing 103 tools will struggle to pick the right one.

Naming Consistency5/5

Every tool follows the asterwise_get_* or asterwise_draw_* prefix convention with a clear noun phrase (e.g., asterwise_get_natal_chart, asterwise_draw_tarot_cards). The two verbs 'get' and 'draw' are semantically appropriate, and there are no camelCase or mixed-style names.

Tool Count1/5

103 tools is far beyond a manageable MCP surface. While the domain is broad (Vedic astrology, Western astrology, numerology, tarot, crystals, dream symbols), the server bundles multiple distinct domains into one namespace, making it nearly impossible for an agent to discover the right tool efficiently.

Completeness4/5

The surface is impressively comprehensive across astrology, numerology, tarot, and remedies, with deep coverage of dasha systems, compatibility frameworks, and chart types. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no tarot interpretation endpoint, no batch operations, no update/delete since it's read-only data), but for a reference/prediction API the coverage is strong.

Resources

Need Help?