Skip to main content
Glama

AstroWay Astrology API (full catalogue)

5-Element Balance

astroway_bazi_element_balance
Read-onlyIdempotent

Element balance across the whole chart. The balance object opens the branches and counts all eight characters three ways: visible, with every hidden stem, and weighted so the total stays at eight. The top-level elementCounts, dominantElement and missingElements are DEPRECATED (year and month only, four characters, branches unopened) and keep answering unchanged until 2027-09-08; the response carries RFC 8594 Deprecation and Sunset headers.

[Group: BaZi (Four Pillars)] [Endpoint: POST /v1/bazi/element-balance] [Required: date] [Cost: 10 credits (Tier 1)]

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateYes
timeNo
fieldsNoCompact mode: comma-separated dotted paths to keep, relative to `data`, e.g. "planets.name,planets.longitude,houses.cusp". Omit for the whole response.
genderNo
languageNo
timezoneNoIANA zone name such as Europe/Kyiv, or auto to look the zone up from latitude and longitude. The server takes the offset that zone kept at this local date and time, summer time included, and uses it in place of timezoneOffset. A clock time that happened twice takes the first occurrence; one skipped when clocks went forward takes the offset from before the change. Abbreviations such as EST are refused. Before 1970 the tz database is not reliable for every place, so send timezoneOffset when the local clock is known.
longitudeNo
precisionNoCompact mode: round fractional numbers to this many decimals. Longitudes carry 14 by default; 2 is finer than any chart is drawn.
dayBoundaryNo
includeLuckNo
stageSchoolNo
trueSolarTimeNo
timezoneOffsetNoIgnored when timezone is sent.
includeFullTableNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
notesNo
sourceNo
balanceNo
pillarsNo
solarYearNo
disclaimerNo
methodologyNo
deprecationsNo
elementCountsNo
dominantElementNo
missingElementsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / dayBoundary
      Added value: +{
      +  "enum": [
      +    "23:00",
      +    "midnight"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / gender
      Added value: +{
      +  "enum": [
      +    "male",
      +    "female"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / includeLuck
      Added value: +{
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With readOnly/idempotent annotations already covering safety, the description adds genuine behavioral context: the three counting methods (visible, hidden stems, weighted), the RFC 8594 Deprecation and Sunset headers, and the exact date the deprecated fields stop answering. That is real value beyond structured fields, though rate/cost behavior is only in the meta block.

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?

Two dense but front-loaded sentences carry the substantive information, followed by a compact structured meta block with endpoint, required param, and cost. Nothing is padding, though the second sentence is long and mixes several ideas.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and the deprecation and counting semantics are well covered. The remaining gap is input-side: for a 14-parameter tool at 29% schema coverage, the definition supplies almost nothing about the non-required inputs an agent might need to set.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 29% across 14 parameters, so the description must compensate and largely does not. It notes only that `date` is required; it says nothing about time, timezone, gender, dayBoundary, trueSolarTime, stageSchool, or the compact-mode fields, leaving most parameters undocumented in either place.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a specific verb+resource ('Element balance across the whole chart') and is scoped to the BaZi group tag. It distinguishes itself from siblings like hidden_stems and day_master by describing exactly what it counts. It does not explicitly contrast itself against the closest siblings, keeping it short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus the many BaZi siblings (chart, four_pillars, strength, hidden_stems). The group tag and '[Required: date]' imply context, but no condition or alternative is ever spelled out.

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