Skip to main content
Glama

Asterwise

by com.asterwise.mcp

Moon Sign Horoscope

asterwise_get_horoscope
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetches an AI-synthesised Moon-sign horoscope for a chosen horizon and returns structured guidance fields plus metadata about the model and period.

WORKFLOW: BEFORE: None — this tool is standalone. AFTER: asterwise_get_natal_chart — if the user needs a personalised chart beyond sign-general copy.

INPUT CONTRACT: period is constrained to the tool schema enum (daily, weekly, monthly, yearly). moon_sign accepts Sanskrit (Tula, Vrischika, Karka, Simha, Kanya, Dhanu, Makara, Kumbha, Meena, Mesha, Vrishabha, Mithuna) or English (Libra, Scorpio, Cancer, Leo, Virgo, Sagittarius, Capricorn, Aquarius, Pisces, Aries, Taurus, Gemini); resolution is upstream. response_format selects JSON vs markdown rendering only.

DO NOT CONFUSE WITH: asterwise_get_natal_chart — full personalised sidereal chart from birth data, not Moon-sign editorial copy. asterwise_get_gochar — nine-planet transit snapshot vs natal chart for today, not AI horoscope prose.

Full output and error contract: https://docs.asterwise.com/mcp/tools/get-horoscope/

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
periodYesHoroscope period: daily, weekly, monthly or yearly.
moon_signYesVedic moon sign (rashi), e.g. 'Vrishabha' or 'Taurus'.
response_formatNoOutput format: 'markdown' (default) for a readable report, or 'json' for the raw structured payload.markdown

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / moon_sign / description
      Added value: +"Vedic moon sign (rashi), e.g. 'Vrishabha' or 'Taurus'."
    • addedInput schema / properties / period / description
      Added value: +"Horoscope period: daily, weekly, monthly or yearly."
    • addedInput schema / properties / response_format / description
      Added value: +"Output format: 'markdown' (default) for a readable report, or 'json' for the raw structured payload."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / response_format / default
      Added value: +"markdown"
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "moon_sign",
-  "period",
-  "response_format"
-]New value: +[
+  "moon_sign",
+  "period"
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, and the description adds useful behavior beyond that: it is AI-synthesised rather than calculated, returns metadata about the model and period, and response_format only changes rendering between JSON and markdown. It also links the full output/error contract. This goes beyond the structured annotation coverage without contradicting it.

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?

The description is well-structured with labelled sections, and the key purpose is front-loaded. It is slightly verbose because it repeats the period enum values already present in the schema, but each section earns its place by adding workflow, exclusion, or contract information.

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?

For a relatively simple read-only tool with an output schema, full schema coverage, and strong annotations, the description is complete. It covers workflow, alternatives, parameter constraints, output-format behavior, and points to the full output/error contract. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to select and invoke this tool 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, but the description adds meaningful detail: it lists all accepted Sanskrit and English moon sign names, clarifies that response_format only affects rendering, and confirms period is bounded by the schema enum. This enriches the parameter meaning beyond the schema alone.

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 ('Fetches') and resource ('AI-synthesised Moon-sign horoscope'), and clearly states it returns structured guidance fields plus metadata. It also differentiates itself from siblings in the DO NOT CONFUSE WITH section, so an agent can tell it apart from natal chart and transit tools.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The WORKFLOW section explicitly states this tool is standalone with no BEFORE step, and the AFTER step recommends asterwise_get_natal_chart for personalised needs. The DO NOT CONFUSE WITH section names concrete alternatives and conditions, making when-to-use versus when-not-to-use explicit.

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

All Asterwise 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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Many tools are well-differentiated by explicit 'DO NOT CONFUSE WITH' notes, but the sheer number of near-neighbor pairs (e.g., crystal vs gemstone recommendations, natal chart variants, dasha systems, compatibility systems, tarot draw variants) creates real selection risk. The descriptions mitigate overlap, but an agent browsing 103 tools will struggle to pick the right one.

Naming Consistency5/5

Every tool follows the asterwise_get_* or asterwise_draw_* prefix convention with a clear noun phrase (e.g., asterwise_get_natal_chart, asterwise_draw_tarot_cards). The two verbs 'get' and 'draw' are semantically appropriate, and there are no camelCase or mixed-style names.

Tool Count1/5

103 tools is far beyond a manageable MCP surface. While the domain is broad (Vedic astrology, Western astrology, numerology, tarot, crystals, dream symbols), the server bundles multiple distinct domains into one namespace, making it nearly impossible for an agent to discover the right tool efficiently.

Completeness4/5

The surface is impressively comprehensive across astrology, numerology, tarot, and remedies, with deep coverage of dasha systems, compatibility frameworks, and chart types. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no tarot interpretation endpoint, no batch operations, no update/delete since it's read-only data), but for a reference/prediction API the coverage is strong.

Resources