Mesoamerican Astrology MCP Server by RoxyAPI

Get one Mayan day sign - Nawal profile API

get_mesoamerican_astrology_mayan_day_signs_id

Read-only

Retrieve the full profile of one Tzolkin day sign: both naming traditions, both published glosses, the world direction and colour under the requested scheme, a composed keynote, what the sign does well, where the same temperament costs it something, and one line of guidance. Built for nawal detail pages, sign cards and chatbot answers about a single Mayan sign.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Day sign id, case-insensitive and punctuation-insensitive. One of imix, ik, akbal, kan, chikchan, kimi, manik, lamat, muluk, ok, chuwen, eb, ben, ix, men, kib, kaban, etznab, kawak, ajaw.
`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.
`directionScheme`	No	Which reading of the world direction and colour to serve for a day sign. The two published assignments differ by exactly one quarter turn on all twenty signs, so neither is a rounding of the other and a silent pick would be a school choice. "madrid-codex" is the codex reading and the default; "landa" is the sixteenth century assignment recorded beside it.	madrid-codex

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`color`	Yes
`gloss`	Yes
`essence`	Yes
`keynote`	Yes
`trecena`	Yes
`guidance`	Yes
`position`	Yes
`direction`	Yes
`nameKiche`	Yes
`strengths`	Yes
`challenges`	Yes
`conventions`	Yes
`nameClassic`	Yes
`nameYucatec`	Yes
`glossAlternate`	Yes
`directionReading`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 20, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "challenges": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "color": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "conventions": {
+      "properties": {
+        "directionScheme": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "directionScheme"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "direction": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "directionReading": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "essence": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "gloss": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "glossAlternate": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "guidance": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "keynote": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "nameClassic": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "nameKiche": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "nameYucatec": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "position": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "strengths": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "trecena": {
+      "properties": {
+        "number": {
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        "reading": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "number",
+        "reading"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "position",
+    "id",
+    "nameYucatec",
+    "nameClassic",
+    "nameKiche",
+    "gloss",
+    "glossAlternate",
+    "direction",
+    "color",
+    "keynote",
+    "directionReading",
+    "essence",
+    "strengths",
+    "challenges",
+    "guidance",
+    "trecena",
+    "conventions"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description does not need to repeat safety. It adds value by detailing the output contents (naming traditions, glosses, direction/colour, keynote, strengths/weaknesses, guidance) and mentions the scheme-dependent direction/colour, which goes beyond the annotation and helps the agent understand what to expect.

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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and a precise list of contents. Every phrase earns its place, with no fluff or repetition. It is compact yet informative, ideal for an agent to quickly grasp the tool's purpose.

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?

For a single-sign profile tool with a rich output schema, the description covers the main purpose, the scope, and the key content. It does not explain the compact option or language fallback, but these are fully documented in the schema. The description is complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly without additional clarification.

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%, with each of the four parameters fully documented. The description only references the directionScheme parameter indirectly ('under the requested scheme'), which is also explained in the schema. Since the schema carries the full semantic load, the description adds no extra parameter detail beyond that, warranting the baseline 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 states a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('full profile of one Tzolkin day sign') and enumerates the exact fields returned. It also names the intended use cases ('nawal detail pages, sign cards and chatbot answers') and the singular scope ('one... sign') which clearly differentiates it from the plural list tool get_mesoamerican_astrology_mayan_day_signs.

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 gives clear context for when to use it ('Built for nawal detail pages, sign cards and chatbot answers about a single Mayan sign') and implies it is for a single sign as opposed to the plural tool. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the singular focus and use cases are sufficient for an agent to select it appropriately.

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

All Mesoamerican 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?