Two things at once: a clear calling and no describable job
Uranus crossed Pisces between 2003 and 2011, dissolving the wall between what is real and what is imagined; the tenth house is where yours landed, which is the part of the chart dealing with your public position.
So you have an unusually strong sense of what you are for and almost no way of putting it on a form. The calling is genuine and the title is a permanent problem. Both of those are structural rather than a stage you have not yet got past.
Read as drifting, running on a direction
People looking at your record conclude you have moved without a plan. What has actually been happening is that you follow a pull you cannot articulate and it has been remarkably consistent about where it leads. Describing the through-line by what the work is for, rather than by what the jobs were, is the account that is both true and comprehensible.
The change has happened before it is announced
Professional shifts here arrive without a decision: you have effectively been doing something else for months, or a role has quietly stopped being what it was. Nobody, including you, marked the transition. Reviewing twice a year what you are actually spending your time on is the practice that returns the choosing to you.
You can feel where the field is going
You sense the direction of an industry, an audience or a conversation well before any evidence exists, and you have watched several of those readings turn out right after you failed to act. The perception is not the problem. Acting on one early, in a small and survivable way, is the practice, and the smallness is what makes it possible.
A body of work held together by what it was for
What accumulates is not a career in any recognisable shape but a set of things done for the same underlying reason, in wildly different settings. From inside it looks like a series of accidents. Writing out what the reason actually was, in one sentence, is worth the effort, because it is the only thing that makes the whole of it legible.
Show the work rather than describe the role
Applications, specifications and job titles all represent you badly, and the made thing represents you immediately. That gap has cost you opportunities that a conversation would have won. Putting something finished in front of people, rather than an account of what you might do, is the only route that reliably works and it is worth building the material for.
You were never going to have a title that fitted
Whatever you end up called will be approximately right and will leave out the part that matters to you, and that is permanent rather than a problem of the current job. Waiting for the accurate description is waiting for something that does not exist. Choosing a name for yourself, however imperfect, and using it consistently, is worth more than continuing to explain that no name applies.
People find you before the job title does
Work reaches you through people who encountered you rather than through any formal process, and almost every significant opportunity has arrived sideways. That is your actual pipeline. Treating those relationships as the professional infrastructure they are, and maintaining them deliberately, is more useful than any amount of effort on a formal record.
You undercharge for what cannot be specified
Because the work is hard to define in advance, it gets priced by time or by whatever the client suggests, and both of those undervalue the part only you can do. The gap is substantial across a decade. Quoting a total for the outcome, and refusing to break it into hours, is the change that corrects it and it takes two uncomfortable attempts.
They have stopped asking what you do
Your relatives gave up trying to understand your working life some years ago, and the silence around it is now mutual and slightly sad. It is not disapproval. Telling one of them about a single specific thing you did last month, with no attempt to explain the shape of it, is more communicative than any summary of a career could be.