Skip to main content
Glama

Vedic Astrology and Kundli MCP Server by RoxyAPI

by com.roxyapi

Get basic Panchang - Tithi Nakshatra Yoga Karana Calculator

post_vedic_astrology_panchang_basic
Read-only

Calculate Panchang elements (Hindu calendar) for any date: Tithi (lunar day), Nakshatra (lunar mansion), Yoga, and Karana. Daily panchang API for determining auspicious timings (muhurta), festival dates, and planetary influences. Tithi calculator with Shukla/Krishna paksha. Accurate nakshatra today with ruling planet. Essential for Hindu calendar integration, muhurta selection, and Vedic timekeeping in astrology apps.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateYesDate in YYYY-MM-DD format. Panchang elements (Tithi, Nakshatra, Yoga, Karana) are calculated for this date.
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
timeYesTime in HH:MM:SS format (24-hour). Determines the exact Moon and Sun positions for tithi and nakshatra calculation.
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.
latitudeYesObserver latitude in decimal degrees. Determines sunrise/sunset times which define the Vara (weekday) and muhurta boundaries.
timezoneNoTimezone offset from UTC in decimal hours. Defaults to 5.5 (IST).
longitudeYesObserver longitude in decimal degrees. Affects local time calculations for sunrise/sunset-dependent panchang elements.

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: +[
+  {
+    "date": "2025-12-17",
+    "latitude": 28.6139,
+    "longitude": 77.209,
+    "time": "12:00:00"
+  }
+]
    • 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. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / timezone / anyOf
      Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "maximum": 14,
-    "minimum": -14,
-    "type": "number"
-  },
-  {
-    "pattern": "^[A-Za-z_]+(?:\\/[A-Za-z0-9_+-]+){0,2}$",
-    "type": "string"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "maximum": 14,
+    "minimum": -14,
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+]
  6. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already expose that this is a read- only, non-destructive operation, and the description does not conflict with that. It modestly adds context about output content (Shukla/Krishna paksha, ruling planet), which is useful, but it does not disclose output shape, error or positional edge cases, or the 'any date' return behavior. For a read-basic tool, this is adequate without being rich.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The opening sentence is functional, but the rest repeats content: 'Tithi calculator with Shukla/Krishna paksha', 'accurate nakshatra today', and 'Essential for... muhurta' repeat/conflate earlier claims. The phrase 'nakshatra today' is especially imprecise in a tool that takes any date. It is not concise enough to be considered minimal.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With 100% schema coverage and read-only annotations, the tool is reasonably callable: the required date/time/lat/ong are documented, and the description lists the four computed elements. It lacks a note on return structure, because there is no output schema, and does not position this tool against panchang_detailed/panchang_doghadiya/panchang_hora. That is a meaningful completeness gap for a user who has many sibling tools, but not a fatal one.

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?

The schema already documents all seven parameters granarically, and description does not need to carry the parameter meaning. It provides no new semantic details beyond saying 'any date', which is already implied by schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema, not the description, is doing the heavy lifting.

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 opens with a clear verb and resource: 'Calculate Panchang elements... for any date' and enumerates exactly what is returned: Tithi, Naksha, Yoga, Karana. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling panchang tools like panchang_detiled or panchang_choghadiya, so it misses the highest marker for differentiation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance explains when to use this tool instead of get_vedic_astrology_panchang_detiled, panchang_choghadiya, or panchang_hora. The marketing-style line 'Essential for muhurta selection' could actually mislead an agent toward this tool for choghadiya-oriented functionality. Sibling tools are numerous and named differently, so an explicit routing cue was needed here.

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

All Vedic Astrology and Kundli 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

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Many tools have overlapping concepts (multiple dasha levels, monthly variants, aspects, transit), but detailed descriptions clarify each one's distinct purpose. Still, a few pairs like planetary_positions vs birth_chart or aspects_monthly vs aspects_lunar could confuse an agent initially.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a strict get_vedic_astrology_* or post_vedic_astrology_* prefix with snake_case resource names. The pattern is predictable and uniformly applied, including the hierarchical dasha drill-downs, making it easy to infer tool families.

Tool Count1/5

With 50 tools, the server is extremely heavy. Many are monthly, interval, or sub-level variants that could be parameterized or consolidated, making the set feel bloated and difficult to navigate for an agent.

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers nearly the entire Vedic astrology domain: reference data (nakshatras, rashis, yoga glossary), core charts (birth, navamsa, divisional), dasha hierarchy, transits, compatibility, doshas, panchang, KP system, and advanced calculations like Shadbala and Ashtakavarga. No significant gaps are apparent.

Resources