AstroWay Vedic astrology

Dashas: Panchottari Mahadasha

astroway_vedic_dashas_panchottari_maha

Read-onlyIdempotent

Panchottari Dasha, 105-year nakshatra cycle of 7 lords. BPHS 46.29-31: the stars from Anuradha to the birth star, divided by 7, give the first lord; Sun 12, Mercury 13, Saturn 14, Mars 15, Venus 16, Moon 17, Jupiter 18 years (Rahu and Ketu left out). Given for a Cancer lagna in an amsha of the Sun: initial.applicable reports the navamsa and the dwadashamsa reading, the periods are computed either way.

[Group: Vedic] [Endpoint: POST /v1/vedic/dashas/panchottari/maha] [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_panchottari_maha"
  }
}

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
`moonSiderealLongitude`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 7, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the description's job is to add operational context, and it does: it explains that the reading is traditionally conditioned on a Cancer lagna in a Sun amsha, that `initial.applicable` reports the navamsa and dwadashamsa verdicts, and that periods are computed regardless of applicability. That conditional-output behavior is genuine value beyond annotations. It does not mention the 20-credit cost or response size, which is noted only in metadata.

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?

The technical core is front-loaded, but the sentence packs in BPHS verse numbers and a full year-by-year lord table (Sun 12, Mercury 13, ... Jupiter 18) that is reference trivia for an agent deciding whether to call the tool. It is dense rather than bloated, yet not every clause earns its place in a tool-selection context.

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 a full output schema and strong annotations, the description need not explain return structure, and it still supplies the key interpretive caveat about applicability. The main gap is that it never says at which dasha level (maha only, vs the antar/prana siblings) results are delivered, which matters in a family this large.

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% and the nested birth-data schema already documents date/time/latitude/longitude, ayanamsa vs ayanamsaId, timezone handling and the targetDate/targetTime fields in detail. The description adds nothing about parameters, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 identifies the specific system precisely — 'Panchottari Dasha, 105-year nakshatra cycle of 7 lords' — with BPHS citations and the exact first-lord derivation rule, so an agent knows what domain the tool covers. But it never states the operation plainly (e.g. 'returns the mahadasha sequence for a natal chart') and never distinguishes this from the many sibling tools in the same family (panchottari_antar/pratyantar/prana/sookshma, or vimshottari_maha). The purpose is inferable rather than stated.

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 guidance on when to choose this over another dasha system or over the finer panchottari levels, and no statement of prerequisites beyond the incidental 'given for a Cancer lagna in an amsha of the Sun'. Usage is only implied by the subject matter; an agent comparing siblings gets no routing help.

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?