AstroWay Chinese metaphysics

Full Chart (computed)

astroway_ziwei_chart

Read-onlyIdempotent

Real star placement: soul and body palaces, the five-element class, all 14 main stars plus auxiliaries, the twelve stages, the 12 decade limits and the 四化 marked on the stars that carry them.

[Group: Zi Wei Dou Shu (Purple Star)] [Endpoint: POST /v1/ziwei/chart] [Required: date, time, gender] [Cost: 20 credits (Tier 2)]

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`age`	No
`date`	Yes
`time`	Yes
`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
`school`	No
`fixLeap`	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.
`dayDivide`	No
`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.
`yearDivide`	No
`tianmaSchool`	No
`trueSolarTime`	No
`timezoneOffset`	No	Ignored when timezone is sent.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`lunar`	No
`ziwei`	No
`palaces`	No
`computed`	No
`soulPalace`	No
`fiveElementClass`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 13, 2026
- 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

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld, so the description's small cost/endpoint/required-input footer adds operational context (20 credits, POST), but it says nothing about computational cost, response size, or fallback behavior when timezone is unreliable.

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 compact sentences and a bracketed metadata block; the chart contents come first and the group/endpoint/cost footer is skimmable, with no obvious padding.

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?

For a 16-parameter computed chart with an output schema, the description covers the output scope but omits any guidance on the school/timezone/dayDivide switches that materially change results, leaving a gap in complete call guidance.

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 coverage is 25%, so the description is expected to compensate, but it lists no parameters at all. The schema itself carries rich timezone/dayDivide/school/fixLeap semantic detail, so the description neither helps nor harms much beyond repeating Required: date, time, gender.

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 the tool's output with specific contents (soul/body palaces, five-element class, 14 main stars, twelve stages, 12 decade limits, 四化). This distinguishes it from siblings like astroway_ziwei_main_stars or astroway_ziwei_full_chart, though it never explicitly states that this is the complete chart versus those narrower siblings.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance. The endpoint metadata supplies required inputs and credits, but nothing routes the agent between this and the many ziwei siblings (main_stars, four_transformations, twelve_palaces, palace_*).

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?