AstroWay Tarot

RWS: Missing Info Card

astroway_tarot_rider_waite_missing_info

Read-onlyIdempotent

Single card to surface hidden information.

[Group: Tarot: Rider-Waite-Smith] [Endpoint: POST /v1/tarot/rider-waite/missing-info] [Cost: 10 credits (Tier 1)]

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`art`	No	Card art set, e.g. rws-1909, rws-restored, rws-vector. GET /v1/tarot/decks lists the sets per deck.
`seed`	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.
`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
`type`	No
`drawn`	No
`spread`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 6, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / art

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Card art set, e.g. rws-1909, rws-restored, rws-vector. GET /v1/tarot/decks lists the sets per deck.",
+  "maxLength": 40,
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedOct 5, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds the endpoint, the 10-credit Tier 1 cost, and the group, which is real context beyond structured fields, but it says nothing about what the card result represents or how reversed cards behave.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose in the first line, then compact bracketed metadata for group, endpoint, and cost. No filler, though the metadata lines are structural rather than explanatory.

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 described, and annotations cover safety. Still, the description omits when to prefer this over its many sibling card tools and leaves three parameters undocumented, so it is only minimally complete.

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 coverage is only 50%: art, fields, and precision are documented in the schema while seed, question, and allowReversed are not. The description adds no parameter meaning at all, so it fails to compensate for the undocumented half, notably the default-true allowReversed flag.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a verb (surface) and resource (single card) with a thematic goal (hidden information), so an agent can grasp the intent. However, it does not distinguish this from similar siblings like astroway_tarot_rider_waite_draw_single, astroway_tarot_rider_waite_clarify, or astroway_tarot_rider_waite_shadow_card, leaving the specific niche of a 'missing info' card undefined.

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?

The description offers no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no alternatives. Given the dense cluster of near-identical RWS single-card tools (draw_single, clarify, shadow_card, advice), the absence of routing guidance is a meaningful gap.

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

All AstroWay Tarot 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?