Asterwise

Personal Year

asterwise_get_personal_year

Read-onlyIdempotent

Looks up the Personal Year theme for the current calendar year from a birth date (its month and day).

WORKFLOW: BEFORE: RECOMMENDED — asterwise_get_numerology_profile — see other core numbers first. AFTER: None.

INPUT CONTRACT: Only the birth date is sent; name is optional and not used. The active calendar year is chosen upstream automatically.

DO NOT CONFUSE WITH: asterwise_get_numerology_profile — personal_year field there is null; this endpoint supplies the annual theme. asterwise_get_varshaphal — Vedic solar return, not Pythagorean Personal Year.

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

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": {
      "date": "<date>"
    },
    "name": "asterwise_get_personal_year"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	Yes	Date in YYYY-MM-DD format.
`name`	No	Not used: the personal year depends only on the birth date. Omit it; it is accepted only so older calls keep working.
`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 10, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / name / description

Previous value: -"Person's full name as commonly written; letters are converted to numerology values."New value: +"Not used: the personal year depends only on the birth date. Omit it; it is accepted only so older calls keep working."

Changed4 schema fields changedOct 4, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / name / anyOf
```
Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / name / default
```
Added value: +null
```
- removedInput schema / properties / name / type
```
Removed value: -"string"
```
- changedInput schema / required
```
Previous value: -[
-  "name",
-  "date"
-]New value: +[
+  "date"
+]
```

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"
+]

First observedApr 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, non-open-world), so the bar is lower. The description nonetheless adds real behavior the annotations do not: the calendar year is chosen upstream automatically, name is accepted but ignored, and the sibling's personal_year field is null. It stops short of describing return content, but an output schema exists to cover that.

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?

Effectively front-loaded with the core purpose, then organized into labeled sections that are easy to scan. Slightly padded by the external docs URL and the redundant restatement in the INPUT CONTRACT, but nothing meaningfully wasteful.

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 single-required-param, read-only lookup with an output schema and full annotations, the description supplies everything an agent needs: inputs, upstream year selection, workflow ordering, and deprecation of the name field. Return-value detail is correctly delegated to the output schema.

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 a 3 is the baseline. The description exceeds it by clarifying that only the birth date is transmitted, that month and day drive the calculation (year component irrelevant), and that name is a legacy no-op — meaning the schema would not otherwise convey.

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?

States a specific verb (looks up) and resource (Personal Year theme) with precise scope: derived from the birth date's month and day for the current calendar year. It also names the sibling tool it is not (get_numerology_profile) and a Vedic lookalike (varshaphal), so it is distinguishable without opening any schema.

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?

Explicit WORKFLOW BEFORE/AFTER directives plus a DO NOT CONFUSE section that routes the agent away from two named siblings with the specific reason (personal_year field is null there; varshaphal is solar return, not Pythagorean). This is about as complete as when/when-not guidance gets.

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?