Skip to main content
Glama

Human Design MCP Server by RoxyAPI

Calculate the nine Human Design centers

post_human_design_centers
Read-only

Calculate the state of all nine Human Design centers for a birth moment: whether each is defined or open, whether it is a motor or an awareness center, its theme, and the active gates it holds. The data layer behind a rendered bodygraph where defined centers are colored and open centers are white.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateYesBirth date in YYYY-MM-DD format. The anchor for both the Personality activations at birth and the Design activations 88 degrees of solar arc earlier.
langNoResponse 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
timeYesBirth time in 24-hour HH:MM:SS format. Precision matters: the profile lines and gate boundaries shift with the exact minute of birth.
compactNoSet 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.
latitudeNoBirth latitude in decimal degrees. Optional and does not affect the bodygraph, which depends only on ecliptic longitudes. Defaults to 0.
nodeTypeNoLunar node convention. "mean" is the smoothed average node, which always moves retrograde; "true" is the osculating node, which tracks the real perturbed node, oscillates up to about 1.5 degrees either side of the mean on a 173-day cycle, and can briefly turn direct. Neither is more correct and they almost always fall in the same sign. Applies to the North and South Node activations. True is what professional Human Design software uses (HumanDesign.ai, Total Human Design) and is the value RoxyAPI verifies against, so leave it unset for a standard chart. It matters only when a node sits on a gate boundary, where the choice moves a node gate. Because a gate can be half of a channel, that can change the completed channels and, with them, whether a center reads defined or open, plus the definition, authority, profile or type. A chart where only one center disagrees is the usual shape, since the type and profile often survive unchanged. If another calculator disagrees on any of those, it is almost certainly using the mean node: pass "mean" to match it. Defaults to "true".true
timezoneYesIANA name (e.g. "America/New_York", "Europe/London", "UTC"), decimal hours (e.g. -5 for EST, 1 for CET), or a fixed UTC offset (e.g. "-05:00", "+01:00"). Prefer the IANA name: it is resolved to the DST-correct offset for the birth date, while a fixed offset or decimal is taken literally and will be wrong if it does not match the daylight-saving state on that date. Invalid timezones return 400 with a validation error.
longitudeNoBirth longitude in decimal degrees. Optional and does not affect the bodygraph. Defaults to 0.

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The readOnlyHint and destructiveHint annotations already establish that this is a safe, non-destructive operation, and the description confirms it is a calculation rather than a mutation. It adds a little context by describing the output as the data behind a rendered bodygraph, but it does not disclose behavior such as error handling, exact return shape, or edge cases that depend on parameters.

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?

The description is two sentences and no filler. The first sentence earns its place by defining the operation and its scope; the second clarifies the output's role in a visual context. It could be slightly tighter, but it is well structured for an agent to parse quickly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers the main output state for the nine centers and ties the tool to a rendering process. Since there is no output schema, the description's own mention of active gates, theme, and definition status helps fill the gap. It does not stress edge cases such as nodeType, but the relevant parameter descriptions already handle that.

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 the description is not required to restate parameter meanings. The main description uses only 'birth moment' and center states, which loosely maps to parameters, but it does not add semantic value beyond the already-rich schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a specific verb and resource: 'Calculate the state of all nine Human Design centers' for a birth moment. It also enumerates what is computed (defined/open, motor/awareness, theme, active gates), making the tool's purpose clear. It misses the top score because it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling get_human_design_centers_id.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The phrase 'data layer behind a rendered bodygraph' gives clear context for when to use this tool. However, the description does not mention when to prefer a sibling tool or any exclusion, so the agent has to infer selection rules from surrounding information.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

The static reference tools are clearly distinct, and connection, transit, and penta handle unique types of analysis. However, the full bodygraph endpoint already returns type, profile, centers, gates, and channels, so the component-specific calculation endpoints create moderate selection ambiguity.

Naming Consistency4/5

The tools follow a clear post_human_design_ / get_human_design_ pattern, with get_ reserved for reference lookups and post_ used for calculations. The pattern is slightly inconsistent because the two reference tools add _id and _number suffixes, while the calculation tools use plain plural resource names.

Tool Count4/5

Twelve tools is within a reasonable scope and covers the broad Human Design domain, including basic charts, transit, compatibility, and group analysis. The count is slightly higher than strictly necessary because several partial-looking endpoints duplicate the data already returned by the full bodygraph endpoint.

Completeness5/5

The server covers the full core chart generation flow, reference data for centers and gates, profile, type, variables, transit overlays, connection charts, and group connections. There are no obvious dead ends for Human Design apps and a reading or coaching workload seems well supported.

Resources