Skip to main content
Glama

CycleCalcs Astronomy

by com.cyclecalcs

Solar and lunar eclipses

astro_eclipses
Read-only

Solar and lunar eclipses: the next or previous from a date, or all in a range, with type, magnitude, obscuration, Saros series and global geometry. With a location it adds local circumstances, contact times, and an explicit visible-from-here answer; set visible_only to true to keep only eclipses visible there. NOTE: count applies per type, so count=3 with type "both" can return six events.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tzNoIANA timezone like "Europe/Lisbon" to render event times in local time. Optional; a resolved place supplies its own timezone.
endNoLast day of an explicit window. ISO 8601 UTC date or datetime, e.g. "2026-08-06" or "2026-08-06T21:00:00Z". Omit for the current moment. Years 1700 to 2200 only; outside that range the API refuses with DATE_OUT_OF_RANGE because the ephemeris is not reliable there.
latNoLatitude in decimal degrees, north positive. Send lat and lon together.
lonNoLongitude in decimal degrees, east positive (Lisbon is about -9.14). Send lat and lon together.
dateNoAnchor date to search from. ISO 8601 UTC date or datetime, e.g. "2026-08-06" or "2026-08-06T21:00:00Z". Omit for the current moment. Years 1700 to 2200 only; outside that range the API refuses with DATE_OUT_OF_RANGE because the ephemeris is not reliable there.
typeNoWhich kind of eclipse to report. Default "both".
countNoHow many eclipses PER TYPE to return.
placeNoPlace name instead of lat/lon, as "City" or "City,CC" with an ISO country code, e.g. "Lisbon,PT". Resolved server-side; the response then carries a required GeoNames CC BY 4.0 credit in its attribution field, which must be preserved when shown.
startNoFirst day of an explicit window (use with end). ISO 8601 UTC date or datetime, e.g. "2026-08-06" or "2026-08-06T21:00:00Z". Omit for the current moment. Years 1700 to 2200 only; outside that range the API refuses with DATE_OUT_OF_RANGE because the ephemeris is not reliable there.
cursorNoOpaque pagination cursor from a previous result's next_cursor. Send it with the same start/end arguments as the first page.
directionNoSearch direction from the anchor date. Default "next".
visible_onlyNotrue keeps only eclipses visible from the supplied location (requires a location).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesSolar and lunar eclipses in a date range, optionally filtered to one location.
rightsNoEither unrestricted, or attribution_required when third-party place data was used. When attribution_required, the attribution line must be shown.
warningsNoMachine-readable notices about this answer. Present only when non-empty. Never changes whether the call succeeded.
attributionNoThe credit line to display verbatim when rights is attribution_required.
next_cursorNoPresent only when more rows exist. Send it back with the SAME start/end arguments as the first call to get the next page.
not_computedNoData this API deliberately does not serve, and why. Present only when the question touched such a field. An absence named here is information: treat it as "withheld", never as "none exists".

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses important non-obvious behaviors: the count parameter applies per type (so count=3 with type 'both' can return six events), visible_only requires a location, and using a place name triggers a GeoNames credit requirement. These details help the agent predict tool behavior and avoid surprises.

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: three sentences covering the tool's purpose, optional local enhancements, and a critical caveat. It is front-loaded with the core function and avoids unnecessary verbosity, making it easy to parse and act on.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (12 parameters, output schema, multiple modes), the description adequately covers the main scenarios and caveats. It doesn't need to repeat output schema details or every parameter, as those are already structured, and it provides enough behavioral context for correct invocation.

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?

The schema already describes all 12 parameters with full coverage, but the description adds meaningful semantic context beyond the schema, particularly the note about count applying per type and the explicit behavior of visible_only. This extra clarification is valuable even though the schema alone would be sufficient.

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 clearly states what the tool does: it returns solar and lunar eclipses, either the next/previous from a date or all in a range, including type, magnitude, obscuration, Saros series, and global geometry. It also differentiates itself from sibling astronomy tools by focusing specifically on eclipses and their detailed parameters.

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 provides clear usage context: use it to get upcoming/past eclipses from an anchor date or an explicit window, and optionally supply a location for local circumstances. It does not explicitly mention alternative tools or when not to use it, but the context is sufficiently clear for an agent to select it appropriately among astronomy siblings.

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

All CycleCalcs Astronomy 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

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct observational need: dark windows, eclipses, geocoding, moon state, phase calendar, planet overview, planet events, precise positions, rise/set times, broad snapshot, and solar day. Cross-references among descriptions prevent ambiguity despite overlapping data like rise/set times appearing in several tools.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tools share the astro_ prefix and use snake_case, creating a predictable pattern. The naming is mostly noun-based (the object of interest), but astro_find_place and astro_rise_set break the pure-noun pattern, introducing a slight inconsistency.

Tool Count5/5

With 11 tools, the server covers the major areas of practical astronomy without redundancy. Each tool provides a distinct calculation or data set, and the count fits the expected scope for an astronomy API.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers solar, lunar, planetary, eclipse, positional, and visibility needs comprehensively. However, there is no explicit tool for equinoxes and solstices, which would be a natural inclusion for a cycle-focused astronomy server, creating a minor gap.

Resources