AstroWay Divination and esoterica

I Ching Reading (Legge text)

astroway_iching_reading

Read-onlyIdempotent

A full reading in Legge's public-domain translation: the primary hexagram's judgment, the text of each changing line, the resulting hexagram, and focus, the texts to read for that count of changing lines by Zhu Xi's rule (none: the judgment; one: that line; two: both, the upper leads; three: both judgments; four: the two unchanged lines of the resulting hexagram; five: its one unchanged line; six: the use of nines or sixes on Qian and Kun, otherwise the resulting judgment).

[Group: I Ching (Standalone)] [Endpoint: POST /v1/iching/reading] [Cost: 10 credits (Tier 1)]

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "astroway_iching_reading"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`seed`	No	Reproducible cast: the same seed gives the same hexagram as /iching/throw-coins.
`lines`	No	Six line values, bottom to top: 6 old yin (changing), 7 young yang, 8 young yin, 9 old yang (changing). Send the coins you threw yourself.
`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.
`question`	No	Without lines or seed, the question text seeds the cast, as /iching/by-question does.
`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
`seed`	No
`focus`	No
`lines`	No
`method`	No
`source`	No
`primary`	No
`question`	No
`resulting`	No
`changingLines`	No
`readingRuleSource`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 7, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-open-world and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the reproducibility contract (same seed, same hexagram) and documents the Zhu Xi focus rule, but says nothing about input precedence when both `lines` and `seed` are supplied, error behavior, or the credit cost inside the prose body.

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?

The purpose is front-loaded in the first clause, but the rest is a single sprawling sentence whose long parenthetical enumerates the six focus cases — output detail that belongs in the output schema and bloats the pitch. It is informative but not efficiently structured.

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?

With a full output schema and complete annotations, the description need not explain return values, yet most of its length is spent on output detail (the focus rule) while sibling differentiation and multi-input precedence go unaddressed. Complete enough to call, but not complete relative to the crowded I Ching tool family.

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 description coverage is 100%, with each parameter (seed, lines, fields, question, precision) already documented in the schema, including the 6/7/8/9 line semantics. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ('a full reading') and enumerates the artifacts returned: primary hexagram judgment, changing-line texts, resulting hexagram, and the `focus` selection. It stops short of differentiating itself from close siblings such as astroway_iching_with_changing_lines or astroway_esoteric_iching, so an agent cannot tell from the description alone which of these to pick.

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 through the schema descriptions ('the same seed gives the same hexagram as /iching/throw-coins', 'the question text seeds the cast, as /iching/by-question does'). The description body itself gives no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or alternative-selection guidance against the many overlapping I Ching siblings.

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?