AstroWay Psychological astrology

by info.astroway

Overview Discussions Admin

Greene: Individuation Path

astroway_psychological_modern_greene_individuation_path

Read-onlyIdempotent

Individuation arc per natal chart.

[Group: Modern Psychological] [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
`source`	No
`keyAges`	No
`doctrine`	No
`disclaimer`	No
`individuationMarkers`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 5, 2026

TDQS

C2.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already cover safety traits (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=false), so the description does not need to restate them. It adds useful context in the form of cost (10 credits, Tier 1) and group classification, but says nothing about computation behavior, permissions, or output characteristics beyond that.

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 short and front-loaded: a one-line purpose followed by structured group and cost metadata. It contains no filler, though its brevity is partly the cause of the missing guidance rather than pure efficiency.

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 astrological calculation with low schema description coverage and many sibling tools, the description is incomplete. Output schema and annotations reduce the burden, but selection guidance and parameter context are still missing.

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?

With 15 parameters and only 33% schema description coverage, the description is expected to compensate but provides zero parameter meaning. It does not mention required inputs, defaults, enums, or the special compact modes, leaving most parameter semantics undocumented.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description names a specific astrological resource (Individuation arc per natal chart), but it is a noun phrase rather than a clear action and does not distinguish this tool from similar siblings such as astroway_psyg_individuation_path or other Greene psychological tools. It is not a tautology, but it leaves the agent guessing what operation is performed.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no when-not-to-use guidance, and no named alternative among the many sibling tools. The group and cost metadata do not tell the agent when this individuation path tool should be selected over related psychological or astrological tools.

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?