Skip to main content
Glama

I Ching MCP Server by RoxyAPI

by com.roxyapi

Lookup hexagram by line pattern - I-Ching binary lookup API

get_iching_hexagrams_lookup
Read-only

Find an I-Ching hexagram by its binary line pattern. Provide 6 digits (0 or 1) representing broken (yin) and solid (yang) lines from bottom to top. Use this for custom divination interfaces where users input their own line configurations, or to find hexagrams matching specific trigram combinations. Example: "111111" returns Hexagram 1 (The Creative), "000000" returns Hexagram 2 (The Receptive).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
langNoResponse language (BCP 47). Supported: en, tr, de, es, hi, pt, fr, ru, zh-Hans, zh-Hant. Defaults to en. Coverage varies by domain, and a field with no translation in the requested language returns English.en
linesYesSix-digit binary pattern (0=yin/broken, 1=yang/solid) from bottom to top.
compactNoSet true for the same data in a compact shape: arrays of same-shaped objects arrive columnar as {"__cols":[names],"__rows":[[values]]}. Lossless, typically 40 to 52 percent fewer tokens.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / lang / description
      Previous value: -"Response language (ISO 639-1). Supported: en, tr, de, es, hi, pt, fr, ru. Defaults to en. Languages without translations yet return English."New value: +"Response language (BCP 47). Supported: en, tr, de, es, hi, pt, fr, ru, zh-Hans, zh-Hant. Defaults to en. Coverage varies by domain, and a field with no translation in the requested language returns English."
    • changedInput schema / properties / lang / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "en",
-  "tr",
-  "de",
-  "es",
-  "hi",
-  "pt",
-  "fr",
-  "ru"
-]New value: +[
+  "en",
+  "tr",
+  "de",
+  "es",
+  "hi",
+  "pt",
+  "fr",
+  "ru",
+  "zh-Hans",
+  "zh-Hant"
+]
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "lines": "111111"
+  }
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / compact / description
      Previous value: -"Set true to receive the exact same data in a token-optimized shape that is cheaper for you to read: whitespace is stripped and every array of same-shaped objects is encoded columnar as {\"__cols\":[field names],\"__rows\":[[values]]}, so each field name is sent once instead of once per row. Fully lossless (no field or value is dropped or changed) and typically 40 to 52 percent fewer tokens on large results. Prefer true whenever token or inference cost matters. Default false returns standard indented JSON."New value: +"Set true for the same data in a compact shape: arrays of same-shaped objects arrive columnar as {\"__cols\":[names],\"__rows\":[[values]]}. Lossless, typically 40 to 52 percent fewer tokens."
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / compact / description
      Previous value: -"Return the same data in a token-optimized compact shape (minified, with same-shaped arrays encoded columnar) to reduce LLM token cost. Lossless: no fields are dropped. Default false."New value: +"Set true to receive the exact same data in a token-optimized shape that is cheaper for you to read: whitespace is stripped and every array of same-shaped objects is encoded columnar as {\"__cols\":[field names],\"__rows\":[[values]]}, so each field name is sent once instead of once per row. Fully lossless (no field or value is dropped or changed) and typically 40 to 52 percent fewer tokens on large results. Prefer true whenever token or inference cost matters. Default false returns standard indented JSON."
  4. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / compact
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Return the same data in a token-optimized compact shape (minified, with same-shaped arrays encoded columnar) to reduce LLM token cost. Lossless: no fields are dropped. Default false.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  5. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description only needs to add meaningful behavior beyond that. It provides concrete examples showing that '111111' returns Hexagram 1 and '000000' returns Hexagram 2, clarifying the mapping. It does not describe the full return shape, but for a simple lookup this is a minor gap.

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 compact and front-loaded, stating the core action in the first sentence. The use-case guidance and examples are relevant and economical, with no filler or redundant claims.

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 lookup tool with one required parameter, the description plus schema covers the essential calling context: input format, orientation, language option, and compact output. The main omission is a description of the expected response structure, but the examples and annotations keep this from being a significant gap.

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 the schema fully documents all three parameters, including the line pattern semantics. The description repeats the bottom-to-top convention and adds examples, but does not add significant meaning beyond what the parameter descriptions already provide. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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: 'Find an I-Ching hexagram by its binary line pattern.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings by emphasizing binary line-pattern lookup rather than casting, numbering, or random selection. Examples further reinforce the intended operation.

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?

The description explicitly says when to use it: 'for custom divination interfaces where users input their own line configurations, or to find hexagrams matching specific trigram combinations.' However, it does not name alternative sibling tools or state when those should be preferred instead.

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

All I Ching MCP Server by RoxyAPI 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
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools have overlapping functionality: get_iching_hexagrams_random, post_iching_daily, get_iching_cast, and post_iching_daily_cast all return hexagram readings with interpretation, and their boundaries are subtle. The lookup variants are distinguishable, but agents could easily pick the wrong reading or casting tool.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a clear get_iching_<resource> pattern with readable modifiers. However, the post_ prefix in two tools breaks the otherwise uniform get_ style even though all tools are fundamentally retrieval or generation endpoints.

Tool Count4/5

Nine tools is within a reasonable range for an I Ching reference and divination server, and most add a distinct access mode. The daily/random and cast/daily_cast pairs introduce slight redundancy, making the set slightly fuller than necessary.

Completeness5/5

The surface covers the core oracle workflow: casting, daily readings, lookups by number or binary pattern, listing all hexagrams, and trigram reference. There are no obvious dead ends since returned hexagrams can be re-looked-up by number.

Resources