Skip to main content
Glama

Kundlit Vedic Astrology

by com.kundlit

Solar & lunar eclipses for a year

get_eclipses
Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns every solar and lunar eclipse of a calendar year with local visibility for one city: eclipse type (total, partial, annular or penumbral), date, the sparsha (first contact), madhya (maximum) and moksha (release) times, the magnitude, and a locally_visible flag. That flag is the one that matters for practice -- sutak observance applies only where the eclipse is actually visible. Use this for 'which eclipses fall in this year' and 'is it visible here' questions, and for sutak timing. For festivals and vrat dates use get_year_events; for the rest of a day's almanac use get_panchang. Read-only deterministic computation (Swiss Ephemeris, Lahiri ayanamsa), served from a shared cache -- a cold or expired entry recomputes and can take ~30s; no writes, no auth, at least 30 requests/min/IP per server instance, plus a shared engine budget of at least 60/min/IP across all engine-backed tools. Constraints: the year must be within two years either side of the current year, and visibility is evaluated for the nearest of 50 supported cities.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
yearYesGregorian calendar year as a number, e.g. 2026. Only the current year plus or minus two is supported; anything else is rejected.
placeNoCity as free text, e.g. "Jaipur" or "Chennai, India". Omit to use Delhi. Any input is snapped to the nearest of 50 supported cities; visibility and contact times are reported for that city.

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. Description adds: read-only deterministic computation using Swiss Ephemeris, Lahiri ayanamsa, shared cache with potential ~30s recompute, no writes, no auth, rate limits (30 req/min/IP per instance, shared engine budget 60/min/IP). No contradictions.

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?

Single paragraph but each sentence provides essential information. Front-loaded with purpose, then behavioral details, then constraints. No redundant or excessive text.

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?

No output schema, but description fully explains what is returned (list of eclipses with type, date, times, magnitude, flag). Covers complexity of parameters and behavior, making it complete for agent use.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. Description adds meaning by explaining that place is snapped to nearest of 50 cities, year must be within ±2 of current year, and the locally_visible flag's significance for sutak.

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 it returns solar and lunar eclipses for a year with local visibility for one city. It specifies eclipse types, times, magnitude, and a locally_visible flag. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_year_events and get_panchang by stating what they are for.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use this tool: for 'which eclipses fall in this year' and 'is it visible here' and for sutak timing. Provides alternatives: get_year_events for festivals, get_panchang for daily almanac. Also documents constraints like year within ±2 years and city snapping.

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

All Kundlit Vedic Astrology 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

A4.7/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct astrological calculation or domain: dosha checks, birth charts, compatibility, muhurta, panchang, numerology, transits, and Jaimini layer. Even similar tools (e.g., get_panchang vs get_muhurta_timings) are explicitly differentiated in their descriptions, and cross-references tell the agent which to use for which question.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: 'get_' for data retrieval and 'check_' for yes/no dosha assessments. No camelCase or mixed conventions. The naming is predictable and readable.

Tool Count4/5

At 17 tools, the set is slightly above the ideal 15-tool ceiling, but it is well-scoped for the breadth of Vedic astrology: each tool earns its place covering a distinct sub-domain. The count feels justified rather than bloated.

Completeness5/5

The surface covers the full lifecycle of a birth chart (details, full kundli, dasha), doshas (manglik, kaal sarp, sade sati), compatibility (kundli match), event planning (muhurta, panchang, year events, eclipses), numerology (personal, mobile, name), and advanced layers (upapada, transits). No obvious gaps or dead ends.

Resources