Asterwise

Tarot Three Card Spread

asterwise_get_tarot_three_card_spread

Read-only

Past / Present / Future spread. Draws 3 unique cards using cryptographic randomness and assigns each to a named positional slot with an interpretive context.

WORKFLOW: BEFORE: None — standalone reading. AFTER: asterwise_get_tarot_celtic_cross — for deeper 10-position analysis of same question.

INPUT CONTRACT: allow_reversed (bool, default false) — Each card independently has 50% reversal chance. question (optional string, max 500 chars) — The question being asked. Setting a question is strongly recommended for coherent readings. Example: 'What should I focus on in my career this month?' The question is echoed in the response but does not affect card selection.

DO NOT CONFUSE WITH: asterwise_draw_tarot_cards — free draw with no positional meaning. asterwise_get_tarot_celtic_cross — 10-card spread with comprehensive positional coverage. asterwise_get_tarot_yes_no — single-card binary answer, no positional structure.

Full output and error contract: https://docs.asterwise.com/mcp/tools/get-tarot-three-card-spread/

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`question`	No	The question being asked; it shapes the reading's interpretation.
`allow_reversed`	No	Whether cards may be drawn reversed (upside down).
`response_format`	No	Output format: 'markdown' (default) for a readable report, or 'json' for the raw structured payload.	markdown

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

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

Changed3 schema fields changedSep 5, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / allow_reversed / description

Added value: +"Whether cards may be drawn reversed (upside down)."

addedInput schema / properties / question / description

Added value: +"The question being asked; it shapes the reading's interpretation."

addedInput schema / properties / response_format / description

Added value: +"Output format: 'markdown' (default) for a readable report, or 'json' for the raw structured payload."

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 4, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / response_format / default
```
Added value: +"markdown"
```
- removedInput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "response_format"
-]
```
AddedMay 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context beyond annotations: cryptographic randomness in card selection, independent 50% reversal chance per card, and the fact that the question is echoed but does not affect card selection. Slight deduction for not addressing return payload structure, though an output schema exists.

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?

Well-organized with clear labeled sections (WORKFLOW, INPUT CONTRACT, DO NOT CONFUSE WITH) and a docs link. The core concept is front-loaded in the first sentence, and every section earns its place with no filler.

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?

Complete for a moderate-complexity tool with 3 optional params and an output schema. The description covers standalone usage, follow-up routing, parameter contracts with examples, sibling disambiguation, and points to a full output/error contract URL. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema: the 50% reversal mechanic for allow_reversed, a 500-char max and concrete example for question, and the behavioral note that question cannot influence card selection. This is meaningful enrichment, not repetition.

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?

Description states a specific verb and resource: 'Draws 3 unique cards using cryptographic randomness and assigns each to a named positional slot.' It identifies the Past/Present/Future structure and explicitly names three sibling tools it should not be confused with, making differentiation immediate.

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 BEFORE (none, standalone) and AFTER (celtic cross for deeper analysis). The DO NOT CONFUSE WITH section names three alternatives with the exact conditions that select them: free draw, 10-card spread, and yes/no binary answer. Nothing is left to inference.

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

All Asterwise tools Inspect

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

Need Help?