Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ziwei-mcp

ziwei-mcp

by xjoey1957
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

命盘解读摘要

get_reading_summary
Read-onlyIdempotent

Generates a Zi Wei Dou Shu reading summary from birth details: a Life Palace main-star description, 13 dimension titles with their palace main stars, and a link to the full reading.

Instructions

返回命宫主星的一句话中性描述、13 个解读维度（命格总览、性格、感情、事业、财运、作息与压力等）的标题及各自对应宫位的主星，并附网站上完整 13 维解读的链接。内容为传统文化参考。

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>",
      "gender": "<gender>"
    },
    "name": "get_reading_summary"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cityNo出生城市（中国），如「北京」「广东省/深圳」。填了且有具体时间时做真太阳时校正
dateYes出生日期 YYYY-MM-DD。calendar=lunar 时填农历年月日，如 1990-04-21
timeNo出生钟表时间 HH:MM（24 小时制）。已知具体时间时优先填这个
branchNo只知道时辰时填：0–11 或 子/丑/寅/卯/辰/巳/午/未/申/酉/戌/亥
genderYes'male' 男 或 'female' 女
lateZiNo子时出生且为晚子时（23:00–23:59）时为 true，按次日排盘
calendarNo'solar' 公历（默认）或 'lunar' 农历
ignoreDstNo1986–1991 夏令时期间，所填已是标准时间时为 true；默认自动减 1 小时
leapMonthNo农历闰月时为 true

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: it clarifies the tool returns only summary titles and main stars rather than full interpretations, that the full reading is available via a website link, and that the content is a traditional cultural reference. It does not discuss link handling or error behavior, but the added scope and caveat are substantive.

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?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence that immediately states the return content. Every clause earns its place: the 13 dimensions, the distinction between titles/main stars and the full link, and the cultural-reference disclaimer. It is dense but not padded.

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 read-only summarization tool with nine rich, fully documented input parameters and no output schema, the description explains the return shape and the important limitation that full interpretations live behind a link. It is nearly complete, though it does not clarify its relationship to the sibling chart tools or how the website link should be treated.

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 100%, so all nine input parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, which is the baseline expectation when schema coverage is high.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description uses a specific verb (返回) and precisely describes the returned resource: a one-sentence Life Palace main-star description, 13 interpretation dimension titles with their palace main stars, and a link to the full interpretation. It is clear what the tool does, but it never names or distinguishes itself from the sibling tools get_chart or get_twins.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description only states what is returned. It gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool instead of get_chart or get_twins, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The summary-vs-full-interpretation distinction is implied by the link mention, but no alternative routing is provided.

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