Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Horoscope

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Monthly Horoscope

monthly_horoscope
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get the monthly horoscope for a zodiac sign. Returns the prediction text for the current month plus challenging and standout days.

Example tool call

This call uses example arguments supplied in the tool’s input schema.

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

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
signYesZodiac sign (case-insensitive). One of: aries, taurus, gemini, cancer, leo, virgo, libra, scorpio, sagittarius, capricorn, aquarius, pisces.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "sign": "gemini"
+  },
+  {
+    "sign": "scorpio"
+  }
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already show read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. Description adds valuable context about return content (prediction plus challenging/standout days), enhancing transparency without contradictions.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, no redundant words. Efficiently conveys purpose and output.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the user gets. Could mention that it's for the current month only, but that is implied by 'monthly.' Overall sufficient.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the schema already details the 'sign' parameter and its values. The description does not add new semantic information beyond what the schema provides.

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 the tool retrieves a monthly horoscope for a sign, with specific output components (prediction, challenging days, standout days). This distinguishes it from daily and weekly horoscopes among siblings.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like daily_horoscope or weekly_horoscope. The description implies monthly usage via name, but lacks when-not or alternative suggestions.

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

All Horoscope toolsInspect
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