Tarot MCP Server by RoxyAPI

Draw random tarot cards with reproducible results

post_tarot_draw

Read-only

Draw 1-78 tarot cards from the complete Rider-Waite-Smith deck with seeded reproducibility for consistent personalized readings. Provide an optional seed string (like "user123-2025-12-27" or "readingId") to ensure the same seed always returns identical cards in the exact same order - essential for daily tarot features, personalized user experiences, shareable readings, or reproducible testing. Omit seed for true random draws each time. Control card reversals (upright vs reversed/inverted orientations - reversed cards provide alternative meanings when drawn upside down) and duplicates (traditional deck draws each of 78 cards once, or oracle-style allows repeating same card). Each drawn card includes position number, reversal state (boolean), keywords for quick interpretation, full meaning text (400+ words), authentic Rider-Waite imagery, and card metadata. Perfect for custom spread builders, random card generators, automated tarot reading platforms, daily card features, meditation apps, journaling prompts, divination tools, and any application requiring reproducible or random tarot draws from the industry-standard 78-card deck (22 Major Arcana spiritual lessons + 56 Minor Arcana practical guidance across 4 suits).

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 results. Same seed = same cards in same order. Use format like "userId-date" for daily consistency, or "readingId" for shareable readings. Omit for true randomness.
`count`	Yes	Number of cards to draw (1-78). Common values: 1 for daily card, 3 for past-present-future, 5 for relationship spread, 10 for Celtic Cross. Drawing 78 returns the entire shuffled deck.
`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.
`allowReversals`	No	Whether cards can appear reversed (upside down). Reversed cards have different meanings. Set false for upright-only readings. Default: true (50% chance of reversal per card).
`allowDuplicates`	No	Whether same card can be drawn multiple times. Set false for traditional deck behavior (each card drawn only once). Set true for statistical analysis or oracle-style readings. Default: false.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only and non-destructive behavior, but the description goes well beyond: it explains the reproducibility contract (same seed = same cards/order), random behavior when seed omitted, reversal probability of 50%, duplicate behavior for traditional vs oracle-style, and the output shape per card. These are behavioral traits not inferable from annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description contains a very long list of use cases and somewhat repetitive material, making it heavier than necessary. The core first sentence is excellent, but the paragraph overlists examples and stretches into promotional phrasing rather than concise, high-signal guidance.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description compensates by listing the per-card output fields (position, reversal, keywords, meaning, imagery, metadata). It also explains count edge logic and reproducibility. Minor gaps: no details about error cases, rate limits, always nothing about the lang parameter's translation fallback beyond the schema.

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 descriptions already cover all parameters at 100% coverage. The description adds practical meaning: commonly used count values for spreads, the seed format ('userId-date'), and psyched context for reversals and duplicates. It also explains the compact behavior through the compact parameter's own semantics, though not all parameter nuances are repeated.

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?

States a specific action (draw 1-78 tarot cards) and resource (complete Rider-Waite-Smith deck) with a clear scope, including seeded reproducibility. The description is distinct from sibling tools by emphasizing arbitrary-card custom draws rather than fixed spreads or daily/single-card offerings.

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?

Provides clear application context: custom spread builders, random generators, daily card features, reproducible testing. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say 'use post_tarot_spreads_three_card for fixed spreads', but the use-case framing implies when this generic tool is appropriate versus siblings.

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?