VedicDost: Vedic Astrology, Kundli & AI Astrologer

Vedic birth chart (kundli)

get_kundli

Read-onlyIdempotent

Calculates a Vedic birth chart with VedicDost's own software (sidereal, Lahiri ayanamsa, Parashari, whole-sign houses, Vimshottari dasha): Lagna, Moon sign, birth nakshatra and pada, Sun sign, the nine planets with sign and house, and the running Mahadasha/Antardasha. Values are calculated, not guessed. Use for "make my kundli", "what is my rashi / lagna / nakshatra". Works for any city in the world.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "date": "<date>"
    },
    "name": "get_kundli"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`date`	Yes	Birth date, YYYY-MM-DD
`time`	No	Birth time HH:MM, 24-hour local clock time (optional; without it Lagna and houses are skipped)
`place`	No	Birth place: an Indian city ("Satna") or "City, Country" anywhere ("London, United Kingdom")
`language`	No	User language: hi, en, mr, gu, bn, ta, te or kn (default en). Text comes in Hindi for hi and English otherwise; links open the VedicDost page in this language. Reply to the user in their own language.
`latitude`	No	Optional, instead of place
`timezone`	No	Optional IANA zone (e.g. Asia/Kolkata); found from the place if left out
`longitude`	No	Optional, instead of place

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful method context — sidereal, Lahiri ayanamsa, Parashari, whole-sign houses, Vimshottari dasha, and 'values are calculated, not guessed' — which builds trust in results. It discloses nothing about failure modes (invalid date/place, unresolvable timezone) or latency, which is the remaining gap.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then the technical basis, then trigger phrases and coverage — a logical order with little wasted wording. The enumeration of chart components is dense but justified because no output schema exists to describe returns.

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

Completeness4/5

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

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by enumerating the returned chart components and the dasha period, which is what an agent needs to report results. Combined with a fully documented 7-param schema and read-only annotations, the definition is close to complete; only error/edge-case behavior is unaddressed.

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%, with each of the seven parameters already documented (date format, time optionality and its effect on Lagna/houses, place formats, language enum behavior, latitude/longitude/timezone alternatives). The description adds only the geographic breadth note ('any city in the world'), so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Calculates a Vedic birth chart') and enumerates exactly what is computed (Lagna, Moon sign, nakshatra/pada, nine planets, Mahadasha/Antardasha), so an agent can distinguish it from likely siblings like match_kundli or dasha_timeline. It stops short of naming those alternatives explicitly, so sibling differentiation is inferred from scope rather than stated.

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?

Gives concrete trigger phrases ('make my kundli', 'what is my rashi / lagna / nakshatra') that map user intent to this tool, plus a coverage note ('Works for any city in the world'). There is no explicit when-not or pointer to siblings for comparison charts or detailed dasha timelines, so the agent must infer boundaries.

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

All VedicDost: Vedic Astrology, Kundli & AI Astrologer tools Inspect

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

Need Help?