VedicDost: Vedic Astrology, Kundli & AI Astrologer

Classical text basis for a chart

shastra_basis

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists the classical jyotish rules (from Brihat Parashara Hora Shastra, Phaladeepika, Saravali, Jataka Parijata, Brihat Jataka and others, with chapter and verse) whose conditions VedicDost's rule engine found true in this birth chart, for one life area. Use when the user asks "which shastra says this", "classical basis", or wants verified references. Quote only these references; do not invent verses.

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>",
      "topic": "<topic>"
    },
    "name": "shastra_basis"
  }
}

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")
`topic`	Yes	Life area
`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

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, closed-world, idempotent, non-destructive safety, so the bar is lower. The description adds real context beyond them: output is restricted to rules the engine actually evaluated as true, each with text name and chapter/verse, plus an anti-fabrication instruction for how to use the results. It does not say what happens when no rules match or how large the result set can be.

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?

Purpose and scope come first, then usage triggers, then the quoting constraint, which is the right order. The parenthetical enumeration of six classical texts is long but justifies the provenance claim, so it earns most of its space; a shorter source list would tighten it further.

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?

With no output schema, the description must convey what comes back, and it does: matched rules with text names and chapter/verse for a single life area. Eight parameters are fully covered by the schema, so nothing critical is missing, though empty-result behavior and result volume are unstated.

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 all eight parameters (including the topic and language enums, the optional time, and the lat/long alternative to place) are already documented in the schema. The description only reinforces 'for one life area' and the birth-detail framing; it adds no new syntax or format meaning. Baseline 3 is correct.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: it 'lists the classical jyotish rules ... whose conditions VedicDost's rule engine found true in this birth chart, for one life area.' The scoping (only rules evaluated as true, only for one topic, sourced with chapter and verse) makes it unmistakable against siblings like get_kundli or check_dosha.

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 invocation triggers: 'Use when the user asks "which shastra says this", "classical basis", or wants verified references.' It also constrains downstream behavior ('Quote only these references; do not invent verses'). It stops short of naming an alternative tool or stating when not to use it, so it is clear context without exclusions.

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?