AstroWay Chinese metaphysics

Day-master strength

astroway_bazi_strength

Read-onlyIdempotent

The support-and-suppress reading over the weighted hidden-stem count, with the three classical criteria (season, root, allies) reported unweighted and the favourable elements that follow. The caveat names both limits: the month is counted like any other branch, and the cut points are this API's convention.

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

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`date`	Yes
`time`	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`	No
`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
`includeLuck`	No
`stageSchool`	No
`trueSolarTime`	No
`timezoneOffset`	No	Ignored when timezone is sent.
`includeFullTable`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`notes`	No
`source`	No
`pillars`	No
`strength`	No
`dayMaster`	No
`solarYear`	No
`disclaimer`	No
`methodology`	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 / gender

Added value: +{
+  "enum": [
+    "male",
+    "female"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

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

First observedOct 5, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false), so the bar is lowered. The description adds real value beyond that: it discloses that the weighting applies to hidden stems, that the three classical criteria are reported unweighted, and two explicit caveats (month treated like any other branch, cut points being an API convention). That is meaningful methodological transparency.

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 densely packed sentences that front-load the core computation before the caveats, followed by terse bracketed metadata. Nothing is wasted, though the technical jargon makes it harder to scan than it could be.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a 14-parameter tool with 29% schema coverage, the description should orient the agent on the key options that change the result, but it is silent on all of them. It correctly omits return-value explanation since an output schema exists, and it does not guide tool selection against the many BaZi siblings, leaving substantial gaps.

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%, so the description must carry weight but does not. None of the 14 options (dayBoundary, stageSchool, trueSolarTime, includeLuck, includeFullTable, gender, timezone, etc.) are explained or even alluded to; the only hint is the passing remark about how the month is counted. It does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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 concrete computation: a support-and-suppress reading over the weighted hidden-stem count, plus three classical criteria (season, root, allies) reported unweighted. An agent can tell what is produced. It stops short of differentiating from obvious siblings such as astroway_bazi_day_master or astroway_bazi_element_balance, which overlap thematically.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites beyond the bracketed 'Required: date', and no mention of any alternative tool. The methodology caveat explains limits of the calculation but does not help an agent decide whether this tool or a sibling is the right call.

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?