MysticAPI

relationship

Composite/connection chart for two people from their UTC birth instants: electromagnetic channels (chemistry), dominance, companionship, and compromise channels, combined definition, and type/authority/profile dynamics. Canonical Energy Blueprint (Human Design) relationship analysis. Costs 1 call.

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": {
      "personA": "<personA>",
      "personB": "<personB>"
    },
    "name": "relationship"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`personA`	Yes
`personB`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedJul 19, 2026
- changedInput schema / properties / personA / properties / hour / description
```
Previous value: -"Hour 0–23 in UTC"New value: +"Hour 0-23 in UTC"
```
- changedInput schema / properties / personB / properties / hour / description
```
Previous value: -"Hour 0–23 in UTC"New value: +"Hour 0-23 in UTC"
```
AddedJul 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully bears the responsibility. It mentions a behavioral trait ('Costs 1 call') and describes what the output includes (channels, dynamics). However, it omits details on permissions, reversibility, or error states, leaving moderate gaps.

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?

The description is three sentences long and front-loads the core purpose. It efficiently lists components without excess verbiage, though the list is somewhat dense. A slight improvement would be to break into sub-sentences.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (nested parameters, no output schema), the description adequately explains the output type (Human Design relationship analysis). However, it does not mention return format or pagination, and the jargon 'Canonical Energy Blueprint' may be unclear. Acceptable but not comprehensive.

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 0%, and the description does not explain parameters (personA, personB) beyond what the schema provides. For nested objects with required fields, the description should at least mention the input structure, but it does not, leaving parameter meaning solely to the schema.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states it produces a composite/connection chart for two people based on UTC birth instants, listing specific components (electromagnetic channels, dominance, companionship, etc.). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like bodygraph (individual chart), ephemeris, numerology, sky_personal, sky_today, as none of those focus on relationship analysis.

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?

The description implies usage for relationship analysis via Human Design but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like bodygraph for individual charts. No when-not-to or prerequisite information is given.

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

All MysticAPI 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?