AstroWay Astrology API (full catalogue)

Zenith

astroway_geo_zenith

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find all geographic locations where a given planet is exactly at the zenith (MC) at the birth moment.

[Group: Astro-Geography] [Endpoint: POST /v1/zenith] [Required: date, time, latitude, longitude] [Cost: 50 credits (Tier 3)]

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>",
      "time": "<time>",
      "latitude": "<latitude>",
      "longitude": "<longitude>"
    },
    "name": "astroway_geo_zenith"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`city`	No
`date`	Yes
`name`	No
`time`	Yes
`fields`	No	Compact mode: comma-separated dotted paths to keep, relative to `data`, e.g. "planets.name,planets.longitude,houses.cusp". Omit for the whole response.
`ayanamsa`	No	Sidereal school by name. Lahiri when omitted. Equivalent to ayanamsaId; send either.
`latitude`	Yes
`timezone`	No	IANA 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.
`cosmogram`	No
`longitude`	Yes
`precision`	No	Compact mode: round fractional numbers to this many decimals. Longitudes carry 14 by default; 2 is finer than any chart is drawn.
`ayanamsaId`	No
`zodiacType`	No
`houseSystem`	No		P
`timezoneOffset`	No	Hours 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

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	No
`points`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed5 schema fields changedNov 7, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / ayanamsaId / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "number"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

addedInput schema / properties / ayanamsaId / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "number",
+  "null"
+]
```

removedOutput schema / properties / count / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "number"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

addedOutput schema / properties / count / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "number",
+  "null"
+]
```

changedOutput schema / properties / points / anyOf

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "items": {
-      "anyOf": [
-        {
-          "additionalProperties": {},
-          "properties": {
-            "lat": {
-              "anyOf": [
-                {
-                  "type": "number"
-                },
-                {
-                  "type": "null"
-                }
-              ]
-            },
-            "lng": {
-              "anyOf": [
-                {
-                  "type": "number"
-                },
-                {
-                  "type": "null"
-                }
-              ]
-            },
-            "planetId": {
-              "anyOf": [
-                {
-                  "type": "number"
-                },
-                {
-                  "type": "null"
-                }
-              ]
-            },
-            "planetName": {
-              "anyOf": [
-                {
-                  "type": "string"
-                },
-                {
-                  "type": "null"
-                }
-              ]
-            }
-          },
-          "type": "object"
-        },
-        {
-          "type": "null"
-        }
-      ]
-    },
-    "type": "array"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "items": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "additionalProperties": {},
+          "properties": {
+            "lat": {
+              "type": [
+                "number",
+                "null"
+              ]
+            },
+            "lng": {
+              "type": [
+                "number",
+                "null"
+              ]
+            },
+            "planetId": {
+              "type": [
+                "number",
+                "null"
+              ]
+            },
+            "planetName": {
+              "type": [
+                "string",
+                "null"
+              ]
+            }
+          },
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    "type": "array"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

First observedOct 5, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful operational context the annotations do not: the POST /v1/zenith endpoint and a 50-credit Tier 3 cost, which matters for agent budgeting. It says nothing about what the result looks like (a set of points, a line, ranked places) or how large it is, though an output schema exists.

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?

One front-loaded sentence states the operation, followed by four compact bracketed metadata lines. No filler or redundancy. The structured tags are terse but each carries distinct information (group, endpoint, required set, cost).

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?

For a 15-parameter, cost-bearing geo tool the description is thin: it never explains what latitude/longitude mean in a zenith search, what optional parameters do, or what the response contains. The phantom 'planet' input is a real completeness defect. The output schema absorbs the burden of explaining return values, which keeps this from being lower.

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 33% across 15 parameters, so the description needs to compensate and instead only restates the four required names. Worse, it says 'a given planet' while no planet parameter exists in the schema, which misleads an agent about how to control the query. Undocumented parameters such as city, name, cosmogram, zodiacType, and houseSystem receive no help.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: find geographic locations where a planet is exactly at the zenith (MC) at a given moment. The '(MC)' gloss makes the astronomical concept unambiguous. It does not, however, distinguish the tool from nearby siblings such as astroway_geo_acg, astroway_geo_local_space, or astroway_geo_geodetic, which all deal with planet-to-place relationships.

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?

There is no guidance on when to choose this over the many other geo tools (ACG lines, CCG analysis, parans, relocation, reverse search). No preconditions, no exclusions, no mention of what kind of astrologer question this answers. The only routing signal is the bracketed '[Group: Astro-Geography]' tag.

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

All AstroWay Astrology API (full catalogue) 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?