AstroWay Astrology API (full catalogue)

Compatibility: Dashakoota (10-fold 39-point)

astroway_vedic_compatibility_dashakoota

Read-onlyIdempotent

Extended matchmaking adding Mahendra(2) + Vedha(1) on top of Ashtakoot 36 = 39 max. Mahendra: birth-star count 4/7/10/13/16/19/22/25 → 2pt; else 0. Vedha: 13 canonical mutually-obstructing nakshatra pairs → 0pt blocked, 1pt clear.

[Group: Vedic] [Cost: 50 credits (Tier 3)]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`chart1`	Yes	Birth data for a single natal chart. Required: date (YYYY-MM-DD), time (HH:mm:ss), latitude and longitude in decimal degrees. The short forms lat, lon, lng and tz are rejected with 400 INVALID_FIELD; pass the full names. timezoneOffset is hours from UTC and defaults to 0, meaning UTC; send timezone instead (an IANA name such as Europe/Kyiv, or auto) and the offset for that date is worked out, summer time included. city is a display label only: nothing here geocodes it, so it never stands in for coordinates. houseSystem is a single Swiss Ephemeris letter, P by default; a name such as "Placidus" is refused, and the case matters because I and i are two different Sunshine systems.
`chart2`	Yes	Birth data for a single natal chart. Required: date (YYYY-MM-DD), time (HH:mm:ss), latitude and longitude in decimal degrees. The short forms lat, lon, lng and tz are rejected with 400 INVALID_FIELD; pass the full names. timezoneOffset is hours from UTC and defaults to 0, meaning UTC; send timezone instead (an IANA name such as Europe/Kyiv, or auto) and the offset for that date is worked out, summer time included. city is a display label only: nothing here geocodes it, so it never stands in for coordinates. houseSystem is a single Swiss Ephemeris letter, P by default; a name such as "Placidus" is refused, and the case matters because I and i are two different Sunshine systems.
`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.
`precision`	No	Compact mode: round fractional numbers to this many decimals. Longitudes carry 14 by default; 2 is finer than any chart is drawn.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`boy`	No
`max`	No
`girl`	No
`total`	No
`vedha`	No
`doshas`	No
`method`	No
`points`	No
`school`	No
`mahendra`	No
`threshold`	No
`dashakootaMax`	No
`recommendation`	No
`dashakootaTotal`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the read-only/idempotent safety profile, so the bar is lower. The description adds genuine behavioral context not present in structured data: the credit cost and tier (50 credits, Tier 3) and the deterministic scoring rule for each koota. It does not cover auth needs or rate limits, but the cost disclosure is material for an agent deciding whether to call.

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 identity and scope, followed by the scoring formula and metadata tags. Compact and mostly every sentence earns its place, though the detailed Mahendra star-count list is somewhat encyclopedic for a tool-selection description.

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?

For a two-chart compatibility scorer with an output schema (so return values need no explanation) and full annotation coverage, the description supplies purpose, scope, cost, and computation. The only meaningful gap is explicit routing guidance among the several Vedic compatibility siblings.

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% and the nested chart objects are richly documented, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds nothing about the chart1/chart2, fields, or precision parameters; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description names a specific resource (Dashakoota matchmaking), states it is the 39-point extension of Ashtakoot 36, and details the two added kootas (Mahendra, Vedha). An agent can distinguish it from sibling astroway_vedic_compatibility_ashtakoot purely from the text.

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?

The phrase 'adding ... on top of Ashtakoot 36' implies this is the more complete option than ashtakoot, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement or guidance against siblings like compatibility_full or ashtakoot. Usage is left to inference.

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?