AstroWay Psychological astrology

by info.astroway

Overview Discussions Admin

Arroyo: Water Houses Trauma

astroway_psya_water_houses_trauma

Read-onlyIdempotent

Water-house trauma patterns.

[Group: Modern Psychological] [Cost: 10 credits (Tier 1)]

(Cursor-friendly alias for astroway_psychological_modern_arroyo_water_houses_trauma.)

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
`source`	No
`doctrine`	No
`h4_roots`	No
`h8_shared`	No
`disclaimer`	No
`h12_unconscious`	No
`totalPlanetsInWater`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 5, 2026

TDQS

D1.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive). The description adds cost tier (10 credits) which is useful, but says nothing about what the tool computes, what inputs it needs, or what the output contains – minimal added behavioral context for a chart-analysis tool.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Very short and front-loaded, but the content is mostly metadata (group, cost, alias). It is concise without being informative, so it neither wastes much space nor earns it.

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 chart tool with an output schema, the description should at least say what it computes and how it relates to its alias target. It relies almost entirely on the schema and annotations, leaving the agent under-informed.

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 coverage is only 33% across 15 parameters, yet the description explains none of them. Required birth-data params (date, time, latitude, longitude) and options like ayanamsa, houseSystem, fields, and timezone are left entirely to the schema, which itself documents only some.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description says 'Water-house trauma patterns', which restates the title/name rather than defining what the tool computes or returns. It does not distinguish it from siblings like astroway_psychological_modern_arroyo_water_houses_trauma (of which it is stated to be an alias) nor from the other Arroyo tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines1/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternatives guidance is given. The only routing information is 'cursor-friendly alias for X', which tells nothing about selection criteria.

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

All AstroWay Psychological 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?