AstroWay Divination and esoterica

Dream Journal Analysis

astroway_esoteric_dreams_journal

Read-onlyIdempotent

Up to 100 dated dream entries searched for every directory symbol and recurring theme as a whole word: per symbol the number of entries, first and last date, the dates, whether it recurs and its trend (later half against earlier half), with the recurring-dream reading when it repeats.

[Group: Esoteric] [Endpoint: POST /v1/esoteric/dreams/journal] [Required: entries] [Cost: 10 credits (Tier 1)]

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "entries": "<entries>"
    },
    "name": "astroway_esoteric_dreams_journal"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`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.
`entries`	Yes
`precision`	No	Compact mode: round fractional numbers to this many decimals. Longitudes carry 14 by default; 2 is finer than any chart is drawn.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`span`	No
`method`	No
`symbols`	No
`recurring`	No
`disclaimer`	No
`entryCount`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the description earns credit for adding behavior beyond them: whole-word matching semantics for symbol detection, the trend comparison being later half vs earlier half, an interpretation returned only when a symbol repeats, and the 10-credit Tier 1 cost. It stops short of noting limits such as what happens with entries exceeding 100 or how unmatched entries are reported.

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?

One very long, heavily nested sentence that packs the whole output contract into a colon-separated clause chain, making it harder to parse than a short bulleted breakdown would be. The bracketed metadata lines (group, endpoint, required, cost) are useful and cheap, but no sentence is genuinely wasted.

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 re-explained, and endpoint plus cost are supplied — leaving the definition mostly adequate. The remaining gaps are the lack of sibling routing (journal vs recurring_themes vs decode) and no statement of what the symbol 'directory' actually is.

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 67% and the two compact-mode parameters (fields, precision) carry their own schema descriptions, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description reinforces the semantics of `entries` (dated, up to 100) but adds nothing about dotted-path field selection or decimal rounding.

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 specific operation on a specific resource: scanning up to 100 dated dream entries for directory symbols and recurring themes, and enumerating exactly what is computed per symbol (entry count, first/last date, dates, recurrence, trend, reading). It does not, however, name or distinguish itself from the close siblings astroway_esoteric_dreams_recurring_themes and astroway_esoteric_dreams_decode.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: the agent can infer it applies when it holds a multi-entry, date-stamped dream journal. There is no when-to-use/when-not statement and no mention of the recurring_themes or decode siblings, which an agent would plausibly confuse with this tool.

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

All AstroWay Divination and esoterica 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?