AstroWay Divination and esoterica

Five-Rune Cross

astroway_runes_five

Read-onlyIdempotent

Five runes in a cross: Present (centre), Past, Future, Help (above), Challenge (below). Reproducible with seed; each rune carries its Old English Rune Poem stanza with our gloss. The layout is modern practice (basis: convention).

[Group: Elder Futhark Runes] [Endpoint: POST /v1/runes/five] [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_runes_five"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`seed`	No	Reproducible draw: the same seed gives the same runes.
`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
`precision`	No	Compact mode: round fractional numbers to this many decimals. Longitudes carry 14 by default; 2 is finer than any chart is drawn.
`allowReversed`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`seed`	No
`basis`	No
`runes`	No
`layout`	No
`source`	No
`spread`	No
`question`	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 safe, idempotent, read-only behavior. The description adds useful non-annotation context: reproducibility via seed, inclusion of each rune's Old English Rune Poem stanza plus gloss, the modern/convention basis, and a 10-credit cost.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact and front-loads the layout, then adds reproducibility/output details and invocation metadata. No sentence feels wasted, and the bracketed endpoint/cost/group information is useful rather than decorative.

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?

The description gives the spread layout and output flavor, annotations cover safety, and an output schema exists for return structure. However, it omits sibling-spread selection guidance and leaves question and allowReversed unexplained, so it is only fully adequate for invocation with default parameters.

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 60%, and the description mainly restates seed reproducibility while offering no meaning for question or allowReversed. It also leaves fields and precision entirely to the schema, so it adds little beyond structured parameter data and does not compensate for the undocumented optional parameters.

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 resource and structure: a five-rune cross with fixed positions (Present, Past, Future, Help, Challenge). This clearly distinguishes it from single-, three-, and nine-rune siblings by layout, though it never states an explicit action verb such as draw or cast.

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?

It establishes the use case as a five-rune cross reading and notes that the layout is modern practice, but gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It also does not compare the spread to sibling options such as single, three, or nine runes.

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?