AstroWay Vedic astrology

Ashtakavarga: Prastara (contributor table)

astroway_vedic_ashtakavarga_prastara

Read-onlyIdempotent

The Prastara Ashtakavarga: for each of the seven planets, an 8 x 12 table of which contributor (the seven planets and the lagna) gives a bindu in which sign, with row and column totals and the Sarvashtakavarga. The same table /ashtakavarga sums.

[Group: Vedic] [Endpoint: POST /v1/vedic/ashtakavarga/prastara] [Required: date, time, latitude, longitude] [Cost: 20 credits (Tier 2)]

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "date": "<date>",
      "time": "<time>",
      "latitude": "<latitude>",
      "longitude": "<longitude>"
    },
    "name": "astroway_vedic_ashtakavarga_prastara"
  }
}

Input 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

Name	Required	Description	Default
`notes`	No
`sarva`	No
`method`	No
`planets`	No
`sources`	No
`lagnaSign`	No
`signOrder`	No
`sarvaTotal`	No
`sourceOrder`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and closed-world access, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds what annotations cannot: the cost ('20 credits (Tier 2)'), the endpoint, and the shape of the returned table including totals. It does not discuss output size or payload concerns for a 7 x 8 x 12 grid, which is the main remaining behavioral unknown.

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 core sentence is front-loaded and dense with content, and the bracketed metadata block (group, endpoint, required, cost) is scannable. Slight waste in the fragmentary 'The same table /ashtakavarga sums' line, which reads as a truncated cross-reference rather than a clear routing hint.

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 detailed, yet the description still explains the table's dimensionality and totals, which helps an agent decide relevance. For a 15-parameter Vedic chart tool, the gap is the absence of any ayanamsa/house-system guidance, but annotations, cost, and endpoint information make it largely callable as-is.

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, so the description is expected to compensate. Instead it merely restates the four required fields already flagged in the schema and says nothing about ayanamsa, zodiacType, houseSystem, or how sidereal defaults affect the bindu table. It adds essentially no meaning beyond the input schema.

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?

The description names the artifact precisely: an 8 x 12 contributor table per each of seven planets, showing which of the seven planets or the lagna gives a bindu in which sign, with row/column totals and Sarvashtakavarga. That is far more specific than the tool title alone, and the closing note about the '/ashtakavarga sums' gestures at the sibling tool. It stops short of a crisp contrasting statement against astroway_vedic_ashtakavarga, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the drill-down when the per-contributor breakdown is needed rather than aggregate bindu totals, and the '[Required: date, time, latitude, longitude]' line states prerequisites. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer astroway_vedic_ashtakavarga or astroway_vedic_ashtakavarga_shodhana instead, and no exclusion guidance.

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

All AstroWay Vedic 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?