Skip to main content
Glama
astroway-mcp

astroway-mcp

Official
by astroway

Plum Blossom (Mei Hua) Cast

astroway_iching_plum_blossom
Read-onlyIdempotent

Cast an I Ching hexagram with the Plum Blossom method from a question’s date and time to get trigrams, the moving line, Legge reading, and ti/yong five-phase verdict.

Instructions

Casts a hexagram from the moment of the question by the Mei Hua Yi Shu method: Chinese lunar year branch, lunar month and day (from the ephemeris, Beijing days) and the hour branch give the upper trigram, the lower trigram and one moving line; the response shows every term and sum, the Legge reading, and ti and yong (the asker and the matter) with their five-phase verdict.

[Group: I Ching (Standalone)] [Endpoint: POST /v1/iching/plum-blossom] [Required: date, time] [Cost: 10 credits (Tier 1)]

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateYesDate of the question, YYYY-MM-DD.
timeYesClock time of the question, HH:mm or HH:mm:ss; gives the hour branch.
timezoneNoIANA zone name such as Europe/Kyiv, or auto to look the zone up from latitude and longitude. The server takes the offset that zone kept at this local date and time, summer time included, and uses it in place of timezoneOffset. A clock time that happened twice takes the first occurrence; one skipped when clocks went forward takes the offset from before the change. Abbreviations such as EST are refused. Before 1970 the tz database is not reliable for every place, so send timezoneOffset when the local clock is known.
timezoneOffsetNoHours from UTC at the place of the question; places the lunar day. Defaults to 8, China Standard Time. Ignored when timezone is sent.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateNo
timeNo
focusNo
linesNo
termsNo
sourceNo
tiYongNo
primaryNo
lunarDateNo
resultingNo
meiHuaSourceNo
changingLinesNo
readingRuleSourceNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.6.1

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so safety typing is covered. The description adds value beyond that by disclosing the derivation path (ephemeris lunar month/day in Beijing days, hour branch) and the returned components (every term and sum, Legge reading, ti/yong five-phase verdict), making the output scope predictable. It does not discuss credit cost or failure cases, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

A single dense sentence, front-loaded with the cast method and then the derivation and return contents, with no filler. It is long but every clause carries information; a slightly clearer break between derivation and output would improve scanning.

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?

With full schema coverage, an output schema and complete annotations, the description needs only to explain method and result shape, and it does both. The only soft gap is that nothing signals that timezone defaults to UTC+8 or that a cost is incurred, both of which are covered by the schema or surrounding metadata.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so date, time, timezone and timezoneOffset are already fully documented, including DST and pre-1970 caveats. The description only adds the linkage that date and time yield the hour branch and lunar day, which is marginal over the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Casts a hexagram') and pins the exact method (Mei Hua Yi Shu from the lunar year branch, month, day and hour branch), which is a real differentiator against time-independent siblings such as coin casting. It also states what the result contains, so an agent knows both what it does and how it differs.

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 phrase 'from the moment of the question' implies the situation this tool serves (a time-derived cast for a question asked now), but there is no explicit when-to-use versus when-not, and no sibling is named as an alternative. Guidance is inferable rather than stated.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools