Skip to main content
Glama

AstroWay Astrology API (full catalogue)

Personal Point Tree

astroway_cosmobiology_personal_point_tree
Read-onlyIdempotent

Tree per personal point.

[Group: Cosmobiology / Hamburg School] [Cost: 10 credits (Tier 1)]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cityNo
dateYes
nameNo
timeYes
fieldsNoCompact mode: comma-separated dotted paths to keep, relative to `data`, e.g. "planets.name,planets.longitude,houses.cusp". Omit for the whole response.
withTnpNo
ayanamsaNoSidereal school by name. Lahiri when omitted. Equivalent to ayanamsaId; send either.
latitudeYes
timezoneNoIANA zone name such as Europe/Kyiv, or auto to look the zone up from latitude and longitude. The server takes the offset that zone kept at this local date and time, summer time included, and uses it in place of timezoneOffset. A clock time that happened twice takes the first occurrence; one skipped when clocks went forward takes the offset from before the change. Abbreviations such as EST are refused. Before 1970 the tz database is not reliable for every place, so send timezoneOffset when the local clock is known.
cosmogramNo
longitudeYes
precisionNoCompact mode: round fractional numbers to this many decimals. Longitudes carry 14 by default; 2 is finer than any chart is drawn.
ayanamsaIdNo
zodiacTypeNo
houseSystemNoP
timezoneOffsetNoHours from UTC at the given moment, not minutes. Fractional zones are hours too: 5.5 for India, 5.75 for Nepal, -3.5 for Newfoundland. Defaults to 0, meaning UTC. Ignored when timezone is sent.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
orbNo
treeNo
sourceNo
methodologyNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds that the call costs 10 credits (Tier 1), which is useful billing context, but says nothing about calculation behavior, authentication, or output characteristics.

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 description is short but under-specified rather than appropriately concise. It uses fragments and metadata tags while omitting core explanatory content, so its few words do not earn their place.

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

Completeness1/5

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

For a tool with 16 parameters, low schema coverage, and an output schema, the description omits what the tool computes, how to invoke it correctly, and which inputs matter. It is not complete enough for an agent to use reliably.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 31% across 16 parameters, so the description must compensate for many undocumented fields such as date, time, latitude, longitude, and chart options. It adds no parameter meaning at all, not even clarifying required birth data or optional settings.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Tree per personal point" restates the tool name and title without explaining what a personal point tree is, what it returns, or how it differs from siblings such as midpoint_pictures or sensitive_points. The only added content is group and cost metadata, so an agent cannot confidently distinguish this tool's actual purpose.

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 when-to-use, when-not-to-use, prerequisites, or alternative tools are provided. The group tag and cost line give billing context but do not guide selection among the many cosmobiology siblings.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources