Skip to main content
Glama

AstroWay Hellenistic and traditional

Decanic Rulers

astroway_hellenistic_hand_decanic_rulers
Read-onlyIdempotent

Chaldean decan rulers per planet.

[Group: Hellenistic: Hand tradition] [Cost: 10 credits (Tier 1)]

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
sourceNo
doctrineNo
perPlanetNo
disclaimerNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, non-destructive, idempotent, closed-world behavior. The description adds useful operational context (10 credits, Tier 1) but no further behavioral detail such as auth needs, rate limits, or computation basis.

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?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence plus bracketed metadata; no words are wasted. The metadata is terse labeling rather than explanatory content, but the structure is otherwise clean.

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?

Given an output schema exists, return values need not be explained, and annotations cover safety. However, for a 15-parameter chart calculation, the description does not explain that date/time/latitude/longitude define the chart moment or what 'per planet' means in practice.

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% across 15 parameters, and the description adds no parameter meaning at all. Key controls such as zodiacType, houseSystem, and ayanamsaId remain undocumented in both the description and schema descriptions, so the description fails to compensate for the low coverage.

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 astrological resource — Chaldean decan rulers per planet — so the agent knows the output type. It does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling decan or Hellenistic hand tools, and the missing verb ('compute/list') leaves the action inferred.

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 guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives are provided. The only extra context is the group label and credit cost, which do not help an agent choose this tool over related Hellenistic tools.

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