AstroWay Astrology API (full catalogue)

Register Dasha-Change Webhook

astroway_webhooks_dasha_change

Fires on Vedic Vimshottari dasha period transitions.

[Group: Webhooks] [Endpoint: POST /v1/webhooks/dasha-change] [Required: url] [Cost: 10 credits (Tier 1)]

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": {
      "url": "<url>"
    },
    "name": "astroway_webhooks_dasha_change"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	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.
`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

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	No
`event`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedNov 7, 2026

removedOutput schema / properties / event / anyOf

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

addedOutput schema / properties / event / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```

removedOutput schema / properties / id / anyOf

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

addedOutput schema / properties / id / type

Added value: +[
+  "number",
+  "null"
+]

First observedOct 5, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare the mutation/idempotency/open-world profile, so the description's added value is the cost (10 credits, Tier 1) and the endpoint path, which are genuinely useful context. It omits lifecycle behavior: whether re-registering duplicates the hook, how delivery is authenticated/signed, and how to remove it.

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?

Very short and front-loaded with the trigger event, then bracketed metadata. Every line carries information, though the tag-block format reads as scraped reference data rather than a description of the tool's action.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not needed. However, for a subscription-registration tool the description still leaves out what payload subscribers receive and how the subscription is managed, which the annotations cannot supply.

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 67%; the two optional params (fields, precision) are already fully documented in-schema, and '[Required: url]' merely restates the required array. The description adds no meaning for url itself — notably nothing about what the endpoint must accept or return for delivery to succeed.

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?

Names the specific event resource — Vedic Vimshottari dasha period transitions — which is precisely scoped. It stops short of saying the tool registers/creates a webhook subscription (the verb 'fires' describes the event, not the action), and it does not distinguish itself from the close sibling astroway_webhooks_mahadasha_end.

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-to-use guidance is given. With roughly a dozen webhook siblings including astroway_webhooks_subscribe and astroway_webhooks_mahadasha_end, the agent gets no routing signal about which subscription tool to pick.

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?