AstroWay Vedic astrology

Dashas: Dwadashottari Pratyantardasha

astroway_vedic_dashas_dwadashottari_pratyantar

Read-onlyIdempotent

Dwadashottari Pratyantardasha: the 8 sub-periods of the running period at targetDate, 3 levels deep, split in proportion to the lords' years from the period's own lord. Inside the birth mahadasha the split follows the full period from its notional start: sub-periods that ended before birth are left out and the running one starts at birth.

[Group: Vedic] [Endpoint: POST /v1/vedic/dashas/dwadashottari/pratyantar] [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": {
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "astroway_vedic_dashas_dwadashottari_pratyantar"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`body`	Yes	Birth data for a single natal chart. Required: date (YYYY-MM-DD), time (HH:mm:ss), latitude and longitude in decimal degrees. The short forms lat, lon, lng and tz are rejected with 400 INVALID_FIELD; pass the full names. timezoneOffset is hours from UTC and defaults to 0, meaning UTC; send timezone instead (an IANA name such as Europe/Kyiv, or auto) and the offset for that date is worked out, summer time included. city is a display label only: nothing here geocodes it, so it never stands in for coordinates. houseSystem is a single house-system letter, P by default; a name such as "Placidus" is refused, and the case matters because I and i are two different Sunshine systems.
`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.
`precision`	No	Compact mode: round fractional numbers to this many decimals. Longitudes carry 14 by default; 2 is finer than any chart is drawn.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`level`	No
`system`	No
`initial`	No
`periods`	No
`ayanamsa`	No
`nakshatra`	No
`currentMaha`	No
`currentAntar`	No
`moonSiderealLongitude`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare this as a safe, idempotent read. The description adds real domain behavior beyond them: the proportional split by the lords' years, and the non-obvious edge case where inside the birth mahadasha the split runs from the notional start, with pre-birth sub-periods dropped and the running one beginning at birth. It also discloses the 20-credit Tier 2 cost and the POST endpoint, which the caller needs.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two dense sentences lead with the definition and then immediately cover the tricky birth-mahadasha case, followed by compact group, endpoint and cost metadata. Nothing is padding and the scoping fact comes first.

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?

With rich annotations, a fully described nested schema, and an output schema carrying the return shape, the description covers what remains: computational semantics, the birth-period edge case, and cost. It stops short of naming the sibling depths, which is the one thing a caller choosing between the five dwadashottari levels would want.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the nested birth-data and compact-mode fields are already documented. The description does clarify what targetDate means for this tool (the moment whose running period is subdivided, rather than the birth moment), but adds no detail for targetTime, targetTzOffset, fields, or precision. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

It uses a specific verb-and-resource framing ('the 8 sub-periods of the running period at targetDate, 3 levels deep') and the mention of '3 levels deep' implicitly separates it from the antar (2 levels) and sookshma (4-5 levels) siblings. However, it never names those siblings, so an agent must already know the dasha-level vocabulary of this family.

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 implied through the depth specification and the targetDate scoping, which suggests this is the third-level breakdown for a specific date. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no pointer to astroway_vedic_dashas_dwadashottari_antar or _sookshma when the caller needs a different depth.

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?