shunshi-ziwei-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

getZiweiChart

Generate a Zi Wei Dou Shu natal chart from solar or lunar birth date, hour, and gender, returning twelve palaces, stars, brightness, and transformations with a selectable algorithm.

Instructions

Calculate a 紫微斗数 / 자미두수 natal chart. date is YYYY-MM-DD (lunar date when calendar=lunar); hour is local 0–23, with 23 mapped to late 子时. Supply a known hour; never guess an unknown birth time. leap_month only applies to lunar input. Returns twelve palaces, stars, brightness, transformations and the algorithm used. No predictive readings or live transit stars.

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": {
      "date": "<date>",
      "hour": "<hour>",
      "gender": "<gender>"
    },
    "name": "getZiweiChart"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`date`	Yes
`hour`	Yes
`gender`	Yes
`calendar`	No	solar
`algorithm`	No	default
`leap_month`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden and mostly meets it: it lists what is returned (twelve palaces, stars, brightness, transformations, algorithm used) and draws an explicit negative scope boundary around predictions and live transits. It omits any note on input validation failures or performance, but for a deterministic calculator the safety-relevant disclosure is largely present.

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?

Four dense sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then constraints, then the return contract and exclusions. No filler and each clause carries distinct information.

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 six-parameter calculation tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description delivers the purpose, key input semantics, and the returned fields. The remaining gap is the unexplained 'algorithm' option, which affects output but has no guidance on when to prefer zhongzhou.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate and it only partly does. It explains date format and its lunar conditional, hour semantics including the 23→late 子时 mapping, and leap_month's lunar-only applicability, but leaves 'algorithm' (default vs zhongzhou) and 'gender' unexplained beyond their enums.

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 ('Calculate a 紫微斗数 / 자미두수 natal chart') and bounds the scope by stating what the tool does NOT do ('No predictive readings or live transit stars'). An agent knows exactly what artifact this produces without inspecting the schema.

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?

It gives an explicit usage constraint – 'Supply a known hour; never guess an unknown birth time' – and conditions the leap_month input on calendar=lunar. There are no sibling tools to route between, so the absence of alternative guidance is acceptable, but it does not describe what to do when the birth time genuinely is unknown.

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

getZiweiChartA