Skip to main content
Glama

I Ching MCP Server by RoxyAPI

by com.roxyapi

Get hexagram by number - I-Ching hexagram detail API

get_iching_hexagrams_number
Read-only

Retrieve complete I-Ching hexagram details by King Wen sequence number (1-64). Returns the full hexagram with Chinese name, English translation, judgment text, image text, modern interpretations for general situations, love, career, and decision-making, plus all six changing line meanings. Use this to display detailed hexagram information after casting or for educational reference.

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
numberYesHexagram number in King Wen sequence (1-64).
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: +[
+  {
+    "number": 1
+  }
+]
    • 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

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description doesn't need to cover mutation safety. It adds useful payload context such as translations, judgment text, and changing line meanings, but it doesn't disclose further behavioral traits like error handling, language fallback behavior, or response size implications.

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 two purposeful sentences. It front-loads the action and identifier, then enumerates the returned content and a use case. There is no filler, redundancy, or unnecessary detail.

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 detail endpoint with no output schema, the description explains the core input, enumerates the returned fields, and gives a concrete use case. It is slightly less complete in not explicitly positioning against related hexagram tools like random or lookup, but the schema and annotations cover the remaining essentials.

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 already documents all parameters. The description reinforces the number parameter's range (1-64) but adds no new semantic meaning for lang or compact beyond what the schema provides.

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 and resource: 'Retrieve complete I-Ching hexagram details by King Wen sequence number (1-64)'. It clearly identifies the lookup key and gives a sense of the full response payload. It doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools like get_iching_hexagrams_lookup, but the 'by number' qualifier largely disambiguates it.

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 gives a concrete invocation context: 'Use this to display detailed hexagram information after casting or for educational reference.' This tells an agent when the tool is appropriate, but it doesn't name alternatives or exclusion conditions, leaving some routing decisions to inference.

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