AstroWay Vedic astrology

Dashas: Shodashottari Mahadasha

astroway_vedic_dashas_shodashottari_maha

Read-onlyIdempotent

Shodashottari Dasha: 116-year nakshatra dasha cycle (BPHS Adhyaya 46 group). 8 planets (Rahu excluded, Ketu included), seed nakshatra = Pushya (8). Sequence: Sun(11)→Mars(12)→Jupiter(13)→Saturn(14)→Ketu(15)→Moon(16)→Mercury(17)→Venus(18). Distribution: 3 planets get 4 nakshatras, 5 get 3. Per AmatyaKaraka tradition: applicable when lagna in Chandra hora during Krishna paksha OR Surya hora during Shukla paksha (informational; dasha is computed regardless). Algorithm port of PyJHora shodasottari.py.

[Group: Vedic] [Endpoint: POST /v1/vedic/dashas/shodashottari/maha] [Cost: 20 credits (Tier 2)]

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 Swiss Ephemeris 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.

First observedOct 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds real context beyond them: the 20-credit Tier 2 cost, the deterministic algorithm provenance (PyJHora shodasottari.py port), and the caveat that the applicability condition does not gate computation. This is notably richer than typical sibling stubs.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose (cycle length, planet set, seed nakshatra) before finer structural detail, and every sentence carries technical content. The parenthetical citations (BPHS Adhyaya 46) and algorithm-source note are dense but not wasted.

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?

Given a rich input schema and an existing output schema, the description covers the domain semantics (structure, sequence, distribution, applicability) thoroughly enough to call the tool correctly. The one gap is that it doesn't orient the agent within the maha/antar/pratyantar/prana/sookshma family.

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 body schema richly documents date/time/latitude/longitude/timezone/ayanamsa/houseSystem along with the fields and precision compact-mode params. The description adds no parameter detail, so the 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?

Names a specific verb+resource (Shodashottari Dasha computation) and defines the system precisely: 116-year cycle, planet set, seed nakshatra, and sequence. However, it never explicitly distinguishes the Maha level from the sibling shodashottari_antar/pratyantar/prana/sookshma tools, leaving the level differentiation to the tool name and title.

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?

Provides a domain-level applicability rule (AmatyaKaraka tradition: lagna in Chandra hora during Krishna paksha, or Surya hora during Shukla paksha) but labels it 'informational' since the dasha is computed regardless. No explicit guidance on when to prefer this over other dasha systems or the sub-period siblings.

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?