Skip to main content
Glama

AstroWay Astrology API (full catalogue)

Horizon Chart

astroway_specialized_horizon
Read-onlyIdempotent

Calculate azimuth and altitude of planets above the local horizon for a given time and location.

[Group: Specialized Charts] [Cost: 50 credits (Tier 3)]

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.
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
aboveNo
belowNo
countNo
positionsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
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, so safety and determinism are covered. The description adds only the cost tier ('50 credits (Tier 3)'), which is genuinely useful for agent budgeting, but it says nothing about how 'above the local horizon' filters results or what happens with planets below the horizon.

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?

Two short, front-loaded blocks with no verbal padding: the purpose sentence first, then group and cost metadata. Every line carries information, though the bracketed metadata lines are somewhat templated.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a 15-parameter astronomical calculation with 33% schema coverage, the description omits everything an agent would need beyond the bare purpose: sidereal vs tropical choice, timezone resolution rules, house system, output shaping, and failure modes. The output schema covers the return shape, but the input-side guidance is far too thin.

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%, and the description adds zero parameter guidance — it never mentions ayanamsa, timezone vs timezoneOffset, zodiacType, houseSystem, or the compact 'fields' mode. For a 15-parameter tool with four required inputs, the description fails to compensate for the undocumented parameters.

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 ('Calculate') plus the exact quantities (azimuth and altitude of planets above the local horizon) for a given time and location. This distinguishes it cleanly from the other specialized charts (heliocentric, draconic, harmonics, vedic_divisional) without needing the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by the resource name — an agent can infer 'use when the user wants horizon coordinates.' But with 80+ siblings, including several closely-related specialized charts, the description names no alternative and states no when-not condition or prerequisite for choosing this over them.

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