AstroWay Hellenistic and traditional

by info.astroway

Overview Discussions Admin

Hyleg Longevity

astroway_hellenistic_hand_longevity_hyleg

Read-onlyIdempotent

Tetrabiblos III.10 hyleg + alcocoden.

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

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
`hyleg`	No
`notes`	No
`source`	No
`caveats`	No
`doctrine`	No
`alcocoden`	No
`hylegSign`	No
`disclaimer`	No
`alcocodenSign`	No
`hylegLongitude`	No
`lifespanEstimate`	No
`planetYearsTable`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 5, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior. The description adds only cost (10 credits, Tier 1) and group, which are useful but not rich behavioral disclosure; no auth, rate-limit, or output-shape context.

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?

Extremely concise and front-loaded: the technique/source line comes first, followed by compact metadata. No filler, though the main line is terse to the point of under-specification.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 15-parameter calculation tool with low schema coverage, the description is too sparse. It identifies the technique and cost but gives no usage context, prerequisites, or parameter guidance; the output schema covers returns, but callers still lack enough to invoke confidently.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description provides zero parameter meaning. With 15 parameters and only 33% schema description coverage, it does not compensate for the undocumented inputs such as city, name, cosmogram, zodiacType, and houseSystem.

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 the specific technique and source (Tetrabiblos III.10 hyleg + alcocoden), which is more than a restatement of the title, but uses no action verb and does not distinguish it from sibling astroway_dignities_hyleg or other Hellenistic Hand tools.

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, no alternatives, and no prerequisites. The group tag categorizes the tool but does not tell an agent when to select it over other Hellenistic or hyleg-related siblings.

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

All AstroWay Hellenistic and traditional 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?