Skip to main content
Glama

tarot

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Random Card

random_card
Read-onlyIdempotent

Draw one random tarot card from the full 78-card deck. Returns card name, short ID, suit, type (major/minor arcana), upright meaning, reversed meaning, and description.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
descYesDetailed description of the card
nameYesFull name of the tarot card
suitYesSuit of the card (null for Major Arcana)
typeYesCard type (e.g. Major Arcana, Minor Arcana)
valueYesCard value or number
value_intYesInteger representation of card value
meaning_upYesUpright meaning of the card
name_shortYesShort identifier for the card
meaning_revYesReversed meaning of the card

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "desc": {
+      "description": "Detailed description of the card",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "meaning_rev": {
+      "description": "Reversed meaning of the card",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "meaning_up": {
+      "description": "Upright meaning of the card",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "description": "Full name of the tarot card",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "name_short": {
+      "description": "Short identifier for the card",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "suit": {
+      "description": "Suit of the card (null for Major Arcana)",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "type": {
+      "description": "Card type (e.g. Major Arcana, Minor Arcana)",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "value": {
+      "description": "Card value or number",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "value_int": {
+      "description": "Integer representation of card value",
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "name",
+    "name_short",
+    "value",
+    "value_int",
+    "type",
+    "suit",
+    "meaning_up",
+    "meaning_rev",
+    "desc"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {}
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

The description states 'Draw one random tarot card,' implying non-deterministic output, while the annotation sets idempotentHint=true, which contradicts randomness. Per rubric, score 1 and flag annotation contradiction.

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 concise sentences: first states the action and scope, second lists return fields. No fluff.

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

Completeness5/5

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

The tool is simple with no parameters and an output schema present. The description fully covers behavior and return content, sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters; schema coverage is 100% because there are no properties. The description adds no parameter info needed, and baseline for 0 params is 4.

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 uses a specific verb ('Draw'), identifies the resource ('one random tarot card'), and scopes it ('from the full 78-card deck'), clearly differentiating from siblings like get_card and search_cards.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description clearly implies usage for random draws but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use. Sibling tools exist for specific card retrieval or searching, but no exclusions are stated.

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

All tarot toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools overlap in purpose, notably the ask_pipeworx family (stable, beta, grounded all route identically) and random_card vs draw_cards for straightforward draws. The polymarket and research tools also share fuzzy boundaries that an agent could easily misroute.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names use snake_case and readable English, but the set mixes verb-led (ask_pipeworx, recall), noun-led (random_card, recent_alerts), and prefix-family names (polymarket_*, entity_*) with no single structural pattern. Readable but not cohesive.

Tool Count2/5

35 tools is well above the typical well-scoped range and far more than a tarot-focused server would justify. The excess is externally provided Pipeworx functionality that dominates the tarot tools it sits over.

Completeness4/5

For the tarot domain, the set covers the full usage loop: getting, drawing, and searching cards are all present. The surrounding data/research/memory tools also cover their own domains exhaustively, with no obvious dead ends.

Resources