AstroWay Astrology API (full catalogue)

Jaimini: Padas (Bhava/Surya/Chandra/Graha Arudhas)

astroway_vedic_jaimini_padas

Read-onlyIdempotent

All canonical Arudhas: A1..A12 (Bhava Arudhas / lagna padas), S1..S12 (Surya/Sun arudhas), M1..M12 (Chandra/Moon arudhas), and Graha Arudhas (lagna + 9 planets). Implements 1/7-trim rule per BPHS Adhyaya 26 verse 4.

[Group: Vedic] [Cost: 20 credits (Tier 2)]

Input Schema

TableJSON 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

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`lagna`	No
`bhavaArudhas`	No
`grahaArudhas`	No
`suryaArudhas`	No
`chandraArudhas`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety bar is lower. The description usefully adds the computational rule (1/7-trim per BPHS Adhyaya 26 verse 4) and the credit cost tier, which hints at determinism and cost. It does not describe output shape or the effect of ayanamsa/ayanamsaId on Arudha positions beyond what the schema says.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight sentences: the enumeration first, then the classical method citation. Every clause earns its place with zero padding, and the group/cost tags are front-loaded at the end.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, and annotations cover safety. The description is complete enough for invocation but leaves selection guidance and parameter influence on results 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 coverage is only 33% across 15 params, so the description should compensate but does not. It says nothing about date/time/latitude/longitude/ayanamsa/houseSystem/timezone. Baseline 3 for the structured schema carrying most of the load, but the low coverage gap is unaddressed.

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 precise verb+resource: computes all canonical Arudhas, enumerating the exact output families (A1..A12 Bhava, S1..S12 Surya, M1..M12 Chandra, Graha Arudhas). This distinguishes it cleanly from siblings like astroway_vedic_jaimini_upapada (single Upapada) and astroway_vedic_jaimini_karakas.

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 or when-not guidance. It never says to prefer astroway_vedic_jaimini_upapada for the single Upapada or to use this when the full Arudha set is needed. An agent must infer selection from the name alone.

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?