Chinese Astrology MCP Server by RoxyAPI

Find the Chinese zodiac animal for a birth date - Sheng Xiao calculator

post_chinese_astrology_zodiac_sign

Read-only

Resolve a birth date to its Chinese zodiac animal, the sexagenary year pillar behind it, and the Five Element phase of that year, so a 1990 birth returns Horse as a Metal Horse rather than merely a Horse. The year boundary is a request parameter because the two schools genuinely disagree for dates in January and early February, and the resolved convention is echoed back so the answer is self-describing. Built for sign lookups, onboarding forms and birthday features.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	Yes	Birth date in YYYY-MM-DD format. Only the date is needed: the zodiac animal is a property of the year, so no time, timezone or place changes the answer.
`lang`	No	Response language (BCP 47). Supported: en, tr, de, es, hi, pt, fr, ru, zh-Hans, zh-Hant. Defaults to en. Coverage varies by domain, and a field with no translation in the requested language returns English.	en
`compact`	No	Set true for the same data in a compact shape: arrays of same-shaped objects arrive columnar as {"__cols":[names],"__rows":[[values]]}. Lossless, typically 40 to 52 percent fewer tokens.
`yearBoundary`	No	Which instant starts the zodiac year. lunar-new-year is the folk rule and the default on this route, because it is the rule people mean when they say what animal they are: the sign turns on Chinese New Year, between late January and late February. li-chun is the classical rule every Four Pillars text uses, turning the year at the solar term Beginning of Spring around 4 February. The two agree for roughly eleven months of every year and disagree for the weeks between them, so a 14 February 2026 birth is a Snake under lunar-new-year and a Horse under li-chun. The BaZi routes default to li-chun instead, because a chart and a folk sign are answering different questions.	lunar-new-year

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	Yes
`animal`	Yes
`element`	Yes
`polarity`	Yes
`yearPillar`	Yes
`conventions`	Yes
`interpretation`	Yes
`elementLocalized`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 20, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "animal": {
+      "properties": {
+        "branch": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "chinese": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "element": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "elementLocalized": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "id": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "name": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "nameLocalized": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "pinyin": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "polarity": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "id",
+        "name",
+        "chinese",
+        "pinyin",
+        "branch",
+        "element",
+        "polarity"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "conventions": {
+      "properties": {
+        "yearBoundary": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "yearBoundary"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "date": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "element": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "elementLocalized": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "interpretation": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "polarity": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "yearPillar": {
+      "properties": {
+        "branch": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "id": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "number": {
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        "stem": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "id",
+        "number",
+        "stem",
+        "branch"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "date",
+    "animal",
+    "yearPillar",
+    "element",
+    "polarity",
+    "interpretation",
+    "conventions"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark it read-only and non-destructive; the description adds behavioral context by noting the resolved convention is echoed back and that the year boundary can change the result. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Three well-structured sentences: core purpose, boundary caveat, and intended use cases. It is front-loaded with the main value and contains no filler.

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 a rich output schema, full parameter coverage, and safety annotations, the description supplies the remaining needed context: what is computed, why the boundary parameter exists, and when the tool is appropriate. Nothing essential for correct selection and invocation 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?

The input schema covers all 4 parameters with detailed descriptions, including date format, language fallback, compact shape, and yearBoundary semantics. The prose mostly reinforces these points rather than adding new parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Resolve a birth date') and names the exact resource and outputs: zodiac animal, sexagenary year pillar, and Five Element phase. It distinguishes itself from sibling list/reference tools by emphasizing a computed, self-describing result rather than a simple lookup.

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?

It states concrete use cases ('sign lookups, onboarding forms and birthday features') and explains when the yearBoundary choice matters, including the different BaZi route default. It does not explicitly name or exclude a sibling tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All Chinese Astrology MCP Server by RoxyAPI tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?