AstroWay Core astrology

Retrograde Periods

astroway_calendar_retrograde_periods

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrograde periods of the planets in planetIds (default Mercury) within a date range: the two stations and their longitudes, plus shadowStart (the planet first reaches the longitude of its direct station) and shadowEnd (it regains the longitude of its retrograde station).

[Group: Calendar & Cycles] [Endpoint: POST /v1/retrograde-periods] [Required: startDate, endDate] [Cost: 50 credits (Tier 3)]

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`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.
`endDate`	Yes
`planetIds`	No
`precision`	No	Compact mode: round fractional numbers to this many decimals. Longitudes carry 14 by default; 2 is finer than any chart is drawn.
`startDate`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`periods`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 6, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / periods / anyOf

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "items": {
-      "anyOf": [
-        {
-          "additionalProperties": {},
-          "properties": {
-            "planetId": {
-              "anyOf": [
-                {
-                  "type": "number"
-                },
-                {
-                  "type": "null"
-                }
-              ]
-            },
-            "planetName": {
-              "anyOf": [
-                {
-                  "type": "string"
-                },
-                {
-                  "type": "null"
-                }
-              ]
-            },
-            "retroEnd": {
-              "anyOf": [
-                {
-                  "type": "string"
-                },
-                {
-                  "type": "null"
-                }
-              ]
-            },
-            "retroStart": {
-              "anyOf": [
-                {
-                  "type": "string"
-                },
-                {
-                  "type": "null"
-                }
-              ]
-            },
-            "stationDirectLong": {
-              "anyOf": [
-                {
-                  "type": "number"
-                },
-                {
-                  "type": "null"
-                }
-              ]
-            },
-            "stationRetroLong": {
-              "anyOf": [
-                {
-                  "type": "number"
-                },
-                {
-                  "type": "null"
-                }
-              ]
-            }
-          },
-          "type": "object"
-        },
-        {
-          "type": "null"
-        }
-      ]
-    },
-    "type": "array"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "items": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "additionalProperties": {},
+          "properties": {
+            "planetId": {
+              "anyOf": [
+                {
+                  "type": "number"
+                },
+                {
+                  "type": "null"
+                }
+              ]
+            },
+            "planetName": {
+              "anyOf": [
+                {
+                  "type": "string"
+                },
+                {
+                  "type": "null"
+                }
+              ]
+            },
+            "retroEnd": {
+              "anyOf": [
+                {
+                  "type": "string"
+                },
+                {
+                  "type": "null"
+                }
+              ]
+            },
+            "retroStart": {
+              "anyOf": [
+                {
+                  "type": "string"
+                },
+                {
+                  "type": "null"
+                }
+              ]
+            },
+            "shadowEnd": {
+              "anyOf": [
+                {
+                  "type": "string"
+                },
+                {
+                  "type": "null"
+                }
+              ]
+            },
+            "shadowStart": {
+              "anyOf": [
+                {
+                  "type": "string"
+                },
+                {
+                  "type": "null"
+                }
+              ]
+            },
+            "stationDirectLong": {
+              "anyOf": [
+                {
+                  "type": "number"
+                },
+                {
+                  "type": "null"
+                }
+              ]
+            },
+            "stationRetroLong": {
+              "anyOf": [
+                {
+                  "type": "number"
+                },
+                {
+                  "type": "null"
+                }
+              ]
+            }
+          },
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    "type": "array"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

First observedOct 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context the annotations do not carry: endpoint, required params, and a cost of 50 credits (Tier 3), which materially affects tool selection. It omits any pagination/max-range behavior, hence not a 5.

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?

A single dense sentence that front-loads the resource and semantics, followed by a compact structured metadata block. No filler prose, though the parenthetical shadow definitions make the opening sentence long.

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 need not be explained (though shadow boundaries are helpfully clarified), and annotations cover the safety profile. Cost, endpoint, and required params round out selection-critical context; only pagination/max date-range behavior is unaddressed.

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 40%; `planetIds` and `startDate`/`endDate` lack schema descriptions. The description compensates partially by documenting the `planetIds` default (Mercury) and tying inputs to a date range, but says nothing about `fields`, `precision`, or input format beyond what the schema patterns show.

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?

States a specific resource (retrograde periods) with scope (planets in `planetIds`, default Mercury, within a date range) and even lists the returned stations and shadow boundaries. An agent can distinguish this from siblings like moon_phase or ingresses. It stops short of naming a sibling alternative, so it is not a 5.

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?

The description explains what it returns but gives no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no pointer to a related sibling (e.g. solar/lunar phase tools). The only usage signal is the implied 'provide a date range', which is already dictated by the schema's required fields.

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

All AstroWay Core astrology 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?