AstroWay Chinese metaphysics

Luck Pillars (Da Yun)

astroway_bazi_luck_pillars

Read-onlyIdempotent

10-year luck pillars sequence. Direction by gender + year-stem polarity per Ziping canon.

[Group: BaZi (Four Pillars)] [Endpoint: POST /v1/bazi/luck-pillars] [Required: date, gender] [Cost: 10 credits (Tier 1)]

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`date`	Yes
`time`	No
`count`	No
`fields`	No	Compact mode: comma-separated dotted paths to keep, relative to `data`, e.g. "planets.name,planets.longitude,houses.cusp". Omit for the whole response.
`gender`	Yes
`language`	No
`timezone`	No	IANA 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.
`longitude`	No
`precision`	No	Compact mode: round fractional numbers to this many decimals. Longitudes carry 14 by default; 2 is finer than any chart is drawn.
`dayBoundary`	No
`trueSolarTime`	No
`timezoneOffset`	No	Ignored when timezone is sent.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	No
`count`	No
`gender`	No
`source`	No
`startAge`	No
`direction`	No
`disclaimer`	No
`luckPillars`	No
`methodology`	No
`startReference`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 13, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / dayBoundary

Added value: +{
+  "enum": [
+    "23:00",
+    "midnight"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / longitude

Added value: +{
+  "maximum": 180,
+  "minimum": -180,
+  "type": "number"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / trueSolarTime
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```

First observedOct 5, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, closed-world), so the bar is lower. The description adds genuinely non-structured operational context: the POST endpoint, a 10-credit Tier 1 cost, and the deterministic rule ('direction by gender + year-stem polarity per Ziping canon'), which tells the agent the result is computable rather than interpretive.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by compact bracketed metadata lines. No filler, though for a 12-parameter tool the space saved is partly paid for by missing parameter guidance.

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 required inputs plus cost are stated. However, with 12 parameters, low schema description coverage, and a dense field of near-named BaZi siblings, the definition leaves an agent unable to distinguish intent or set pragmatic options like count or dayBoundary.

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 33%, below the 50% threshold, so the description is expected to compensate and does not. It names only date and gender, both already required and documented in the schema, and says nothing about count, dayBoundary, trueSolarTime, longitude, or language, all of which materially change the pillars produced.

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?

States a concrete resource and scope: a '10-year luck pillars sequence' (Da Yun), which is a specific BaZi artefact rather than a generic chart. It does not, however, disambiguate against closely named siblings such as astroway_bazi_year_pillar_decade or astroway_bazi_yearly, which an agent could easily confuse with a decade-length sequence.

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?

The only usage information is '[Required: date, gender]', which merely restates the schema's required list. There is no statement of when to reach for this tool versus the other 20+ astroway_bazi_* tools, no exclusions, and no prerequisites such as needing an existing chart.

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

All AstroWay Chinese metaphysics 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?