Skip to main content
Glama

Chinese Astrology MCP Server by RoxyAPI

by com.roxyapi
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List the 24 solar terms - Jie Qi calendar API with exact instants

get_chinese_astrology_calendar_solar_terms_year
Read-only

Return all 24 solar terms of a year as astronomical instants rather than dates, each computed from the moment the sun reaches its exact apparent longitude at 15 degree steps. The year is the SOLAR year, which opens at Li Chun in early February, so Minor Cold and Major Cold, the last two terms, are dated in the January of the following Gregorian year. Every instant is returned twice, once in UTC and once at the UTC+8 reference meridian the Chinese calendar is defined on. Built for calendar apps, festival scheduling, and any BaZi feature that has to place a birth on the correct side of a term boundary.

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
yearYesSolar year, 1900 to 2100. The year opens at Li Chun rather than on 1 January, so its last two terms fall in the following January.
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.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
yearYes
termsYes
totalYes
referenceOffsetYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "referenceOffset": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "terms": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "chinese": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "id": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "instantUtc": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "localDate": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "localTime": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "longitude": {
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "pinyin": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "id",
+          "name",
+          "chinese",
+          "pinyin",
+          "longitude",
+          "type",
+          "instantUtc",
+          "localDate",
+          "localTime"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "total": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "year": {
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "year",
+    "referenceOffset",
+    "total",
+    "terms"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / year / type
      Previous value: -"number"New value: +"integer"
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / year / maximum
      Added value: +2100
    • addedInput schema / properties / year / minimum
      Added value: +1900
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only and non-destructive, and the description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: instants are computed from exact solar longitude, the year opens at Li Chun, the last two terms fall in the following Gregorian January, and every instant is returned in both UTC and UTC+8. This gives an agent a strong model of the tool's behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the core differentiator and is reasonably concise. The final use-case sentence adds useful context, but some content, such as the solar-year explanation, partially repeats the schema and could be trimmed without losing essential meaning.

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 output schema exists and annotations cover safety, the description is complete for invocation: it explains what is returned, the unusual year boundary, the dual timezone representation, and the intended domain. An agent has everything needed to decide to call it and interpret the result.

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 three parameters. The description reinforces the meaning of 'year' with the solar-year convention, but this largely duplicates the schema's parameter description rather than adding new semantic value.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Return all 24 solar terms of a year as astronomical instants rather than dates.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from the calendar day/month siblings by emphasizing exact instants, 15-degree apparent longitude steps, and the solar-year convention opening at Li Chun.

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 explicit intended use cases: 'Built for calendar apps, festival scheduling, and any BaZi feature that has to place a birth on the correct side of a term boundary.' It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, so it falls slightly short of full guidance.

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

All Chinese Astrology MCP Server by RoxyAPI toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources