Skip to main content
Glama

Kabbalah MCP Server by RoxyAPI

List the Hebrew letters - Hebrew alphabet API with the Sefer Yetzirah attributions

get_kabbalah_letters
Read-only

Return all 22 Hebrew letters with their numeric value, their final form, their Sefer Yetzirah class, the element or planet or sign they carry under the requested reading, the tarot trump on their path and the path number itself. The letter attributions are a documented school split rather than a fixed table, so the reading is a request parameter and the response echoes which one produced the answer. Built for letter reference pages, tarot apps that render the paths, and any feature that has to say what a letter carries and on whose authority.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
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
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.
letterAttributionNoWhich reading assigns the element, planet or sign to each letter. The seven double letters are the contested column and the four readings genuinely disagree on them; the twelve simple letters run in natural zodiacal order in all four. The golden-dawn member does NOT exchange He and Tzade, which is a later change from a different author.sefer-yetzirah-gra

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
totalYes
lettersYes
classCountsYes
letterAttributionYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "properties": {
      +    "classCounts": {
      +      "properties": {
      +        "double": {
      +          "type": "number"
      +        },
      +        "mother": {
      +          "type": "number"
      +        },
      +        "simple": {
      +          "type": "number"
      +        }
      +      },
      +      "required": [
      +        "mother",
      +        "double",
      +        "simple"
      +      ],
      +      "type": "object"
      +    },
      +    "letterAttribution": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "letters": {
      +      "items": {
      +        "properties": {
      +          "attribution": {
      +            "properties": {
      +              "kind": {
      +                "type": "string"
      +              },
      +              "value": {
      +                "type": "string"
      +              }
      +            },
      +            "required": [
      +              "kind",
      +              "value"
      +            ],
      +            "type": "object"
      +          },
      +          "classReading": {
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "final": {
      +            "type": [
      +              "string",
      +              "null"
      +            ]
      +          },
      +          "finalValue": {
      +            "type": [
      +              "number",
      +              "null"
      +            ]
      +          },
      +          "id": {
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "letter": {
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "letterClass": {
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "meaning": {
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "name": {
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "ordinal": {
      +            "type": "number"
      +          },
      +          "path": {
      +            "type": [
      +              "number",
      +              "null"
      +            ]
      +          },
      +          "romanization": {
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "trump": {
      +            "properties": {
      +              "id": {
      +                "type": "string"
      +              },
      +              "name": {
      +                "type": "string"
      +              },
      +              "number": {
      +                "type": "string"
      +              }
      +            },
      +            "required": [
      +              "id",
      +              "number",
      +              "name"
      +            ],
      +            "type": "object"
      +          },
      +          "value": {
      +            "type": "number"
      +          }
      +        },
      +        "required": [
      +          "id",
      +          "letter",
      +          "final",
      +          "romanization",
      +          "name",
      +          "meaning",
      +          "ordinal",
      +          "value",
      +          "finalValue",
      +          "letterClass",
      +          "classReading",
      +          "attribution",
      +          "trump",
      +          "path"
      +        ],
      +        "type": "object"
      +      },
      +      "type": "array"
      +    },
      +    "total": {
      +      "type": "number"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "required": [
      +    "total",
      +    "letterAttribution",
      +    "classCounts",
      +    "letters"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, the safety profile is already covered by annotations. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context by stating that attributions are 'a documented school split rather than a fixed table' and that the response 'echoes which one produced the answer'.

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?

Two information-dense sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the output contents, and the second explains the important variability and intended use cases.

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?

The tool has no required parameters and an output schema exists, so the return shape is already specified. The description covers what is returned, why attributions vary, how the reading parameter influences results, and where the tool is meant to be used.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by framing the letterAttribution parameter as a 'reading' and explaining that the response identifies which reading generated the result. The schema itself also contains detailed context about contesting readings, supporting the elevated score.

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 begins with a precise action and resource: 'Return all 22 Hebrew letters' with the exact fields included. The phrase 'all 22' also distinguishes this list endpoint from the singular get_kabbalah_letters_id, and the mention of 'requested reading' sets expectations that this is an attribution-aware reference tool.

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 explicitly names the target use cases: letter reference pages, tarot apps that render paths, and any feature that needs to state what a letter carries and on whose authority. It does not name sibling alternatives or describe when to use a different endpoint, but the context is clear and free of exclusions.

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.

Resources