I Ching MCP Server by RoxyAPI

Cast an I-Ching reading

get_iching_cast

Read-only

Generate an authentic I-Ching reading using the traditional three-coin casting method. Each of the six lines is determined by virtually tossing three coins, producing values 6-9 where 6 (old yin) and 9 (old yang) are changing lines. Returns the primary hexagram with full interpretation, the line values showing which lines are changing, and if any lines change, the resulting hexagram that the primary transforms into. Optionally provide a seed for reproducible castings. Perfect for divination apps, oracle features, and decision-making tools.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`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
`seed`	No	Optional seed for reproducible castings. Same seed = same casting every time. Pass any unique identifier (userId, session token, question hash). Omit for random casting.
`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.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description goes beyond the annotations by explaining the casting mechanism, line values 6-9, changing lines, and the return of both primary and transformed hexagrams. It also notes reproducible castings via seed. Annotations already mark this as read-only and non-destructive, and the description adds detailed behavioral context without contradicting them.

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 rich but focused, using a compact opening sentence, then a clear breakdown of the output. Each sentence contributes to understanding; no redundant filler. It is a bit long but not bloated.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description takes responsibility for explaining the return value. It explicitly names the primary hexagram, line values, changing lines, and the resulting hexagram transformation. It supplies enough context for an agent to call the tool and interpret the result correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, and both `lang`, `seed`, and `compact` are explained in the schema. The description adds the important behavioral note about seed-driven reproducibility, but this mostly reinforces rather than extends schema semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a clear verb ('generate') and resource (an I-Ching reading), and describes the traditional three-coin casting method in detail. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_iching_hexagrams and get_iching_hexagrams_random by focusing on full readings with changing lines, not just hexagram data.

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?

The description explicitly identifies ideal use cases ('divination apps, oracle features, decision-making tools') and clarifies when seed is useful. It does not explicitly define when to use sibling tools, but the use cases are clear enough for selection.

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

All I Ching MCP Server by RoxyAPI 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

A4/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

Most tools are clearly distinct: listing hexagrams, lookup by number, lookup by binary pattern, and trigram resources serve different purposes. However, get_iching_cast and post_iching_daily_cast both describe essentially the same casting operation with only the daily seed difference, and get_iching_hexagrams_random overlaps conceptually with post_iching_daily. The descriptions help, but an agent could easily select the wrong casting or random-reading tool.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tools use snake_case and share the iching_ domain prefix, creating a predictable family. The main inconsistency is mixing get_ and post_ prefixes for very similar operations, while get_iching_hexagrams_lookup/number/random are also varied noun suffixes rather than a strict verb_noun pattern.

Tool Count5/5

With 9 tools, the server is well-scoped for an I-Ching reference and divination toolset. Each tool contributes either a lookup, listing, casting, or daily oracle function without unnecessary bloat.

Completeness5/5

The surface covers all 64 hexagrams, all 8 trigrams, detailed hexagram lookup by both King Wen number and binary line pattern, random readings, traditional casting, and seeded daily variants. There is no significant missing operation needed for the stated divination and oracle use cases.

Resources

Need Help?