Tarot MCP Server by RoxyAPI

Get detailed tarot card information

get_tarot_cards_id

Read-only

Retrieve comprehensive details for a specific tarot card from the traditional Rider-Waite-Smith deck including complete upright meanings (card drawn normally) and reversed meanings (inverted/upside down interpretations for nuanced guidance). Each card provides keywords for quick reference, full interpretations (400+ words each for upright and reversed orientations), and guidance across life domains: love and relationships, career and professional growth, finances and material success, health and wellbeing, spirituality and personal development. Major Arcana cards (0-21) reveal deep spiritual lessons and life-changing themes. Minor Arcana cards (Ace through King in Cups, Wands, Swords, Pentacles) address practical daily situations and specific challenges. Use card ID in kebab-case format: Major Arcana like "fool", "magician", "death", "tower", or Minor Arcana like "ace-of-cups", "seven-of-wands", "queen-of-swords", "king-of-pentacles". Major Arcana IDs carry no leading article, though one is accepted, so "the-star" and "star" both return The Star. Essential for detailed tarot study, reading interpretations, divination apps, fortune-telling platforms, spiritual guidance tools, and professional tarot learning applications.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Card identifier. Major arcana: "fool", "magician", "death". Minor arcana: "ace-of-cups", "seven-of-wands", "queen-of-swords", "king-of-pentacles". Casing and separators are flexible, so "Fool" and "ACE_OF_CUPS" both resolve, and a leading definite article is optional, so "the-star" resolves to "star". The canonical form, and the one every response echoes, is kebab-case with no article.
`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.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

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 safety profile is covered. The description adds useful expected behavior: human-level, reversed meanings, complete interpretations per orientation, life-domain guidance, and arcana structure. Nothing contradicts annotations.

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 detailed but mostly earns its extra length by explaining content scope, arcana types, and ID conventions. It is front-loaded with the purpose. Some redundancy exists with the schema's ID examples and a trailing application-use sentence, but overall it remains reasonable and structured.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by specifying the return content well: upright and reversed meanings, keywords, 400+ word interpretations, life domains, and arcana differences. It does not describe invalid-ID error behavior or language fallback, though the language fallback is covered in the schema.

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%, and the schema already explains id, lang, and compact parameters with examples. The description only repeats and elaborates some id format advice, so it adds little beyond the schema. 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 opens with a concrete verb and resource: 'Retrieve comprehensive details for a specific tarot card.' It then explains what the details include and distinguishes itself from list-style and spread-style siblings by emphasizing single-card lookup and requiring a card ID.

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 establishes clear usage context: detailed tarot study, divination apps, fortune-telling platforms, and professional learning. It does not explicitly say when to use get_tarot_cards or post_tarot_spreads_* instead, but the single-card focus makes the main use case unambiguous.

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

All Tarot 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

A4.2/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: deck list/detail, daily draws, generic draws, four named spreads, custom spreads, and yes/no readings. Even the overlapping draw endpoints are distinguishable by their specific use cases.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names consistently follow a snake_case verb_tarot_resource pattern, which makes the toolset predictable and easy to navigate. The only minor oddity is get_tarot_cards_id, but it does not break the overall convention.

Tool Count5/5

Ten tools is an ideal size for a tarot API: two reference tools, one daily draw, one generic draw, four fixed spreads, one custom spread, and one yes/no tool. Each tool earns its place without overlap or bloat.

Completeness5/5

The surface covers the full tarot domain: browsing cards, retrieving detailed card interpretations, drawing cards, multiple popular spread types, custom spreads, and targeted yes/no guidance. There are no obvious dead ends or critical missing workflows.

Resources

Need Help?