Get a focused reading for ONE specific divination system from the 26. Free MCP tier covers the 5 preview systems (bazi, vedic, western, ninestar, thai); the other 21 + the in-depth Cosmic Blueprint PDF are at mythsensus.com/pricing.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| day | Yes | ||
| lat | No | ||
| lon | No | ||
| hour | No | ||
| lang | No | ||
| year | Yes | ||
| month | Yes | ||
| minute | No | ||
| system | Yes | System slug — see list_26_systems | |
| timezone | No |
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 pricing limitations for some systems but does not clarify whether the tool is read-only, what the response format looks like, or any side effects. The lack of output schema and behavioral details leaves the agent underinformed about expected behavior.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two sentences with no fluff. The first sentence delivers the core purpose, and the second provides relevant pricing/availability context. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
This tool has 10 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, creating a high burden on the description. The description covers system selection and pricing but omits critical information about birth data parameters, coordinate/timezone inputs, language selection, and the structure of the returned reading. The agent cannot reliably invoke the tool without this information.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
With schema description coverage at only 10%, the description must compensate. It adds context for the 'system' parameter by noting there are 26 systems and that 5 are free, which is helpful. However, it provides no explanation for the other nine parameters (year, month, day, hour, minute, lat, lon, timezone, lang), leaving their meaning and usage largely undefined.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's function: acquiring a focused reading for one specific divination system among 26. This verb+resource combination is specific and distinguishes the tool from siblings such as list_26_systems (which lists systems) or get_system_rules (which provides rules).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies that this tool is used to obtain deep readings for a single divination system, but it does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives. It does provide useful context about free vs paid systems, which informs when the tool can be used freely, but it does not name sibling tools as alternatives or state when not to use this tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct resource or action: engine metadata, score calculation, daily draw, system-specific reading, deity lore, system rules, and system list. No two tools overlap in purpose, and descriptions clearly delineate boundaries.
The majority of tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern (calculate_, get_, list_), but two deviate: 'about_mythsensus_engine' uses a preposition and 'daily_blessing' is an adjective_noun phrase. This minor inconsistency is easy to parse but breaks the otherwise uniform convention.
Seven tools is well within the ideal 3-15 range and each covers a meaningful aspect of the divination domain without redundancy. The count feels appropriately scoped for the server's purpose.
The tool surface covers the full user journey: list systems, query rules, calculate score, get deep readings, look up deities, and draw daily blessings, plus engine transparency. There are no obvious gaps or dead ends; the domain appears fully served.
