AstroWay Vedic astrology

Doshas: Mangal (Mars affliction)

astroway_vedic_doshas_parashara_mangal

Read-onlyIdempotent

Mangal Dosha detection with school selection (school body param: strict BPHS verse 1/4/7/8/12 from Lagna only; north 1/2/4/7/8/12 from Lagna+Moon; south 1/2/4/7/8/12 from Lagna+Moon+Venus, default). Canonical sign-based cancellations applied: Mars in own (Aries/Scorpio) or exalted (Capricorn) sign cancels; per-house cancellations (house 2: Gemini/Virgo; house 4: Taurus/Libra; house 12: Taurus/Libra/Gemini/Virgo).

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

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
`dosha`	No
`school`	No
`details`	No
`present`	No
`severity`	No
`lagnaSign`	No
`mangalSchool`	No
`affectedHouses`	No
`contributingPlanets`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the bar is lower, and the description still adds substantive domain behavior: the exact house rules per school and the canonical sign- and house-based cancellations that affect the result. This tells the agent how the verdict is derived, not just what is returned.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first clause, followed by the school modes and then cancellations. The parentheticals are dense but every clause carries domain meaning; nothing is padded.

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 needn't be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. The description supplies the missing domain semantics (school definitions and cancellation logic) needed to interpret the result, though the schema/description mismatch on the `school` param leaves a small gap.

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 only 33% and the schema does not even contain the `school` property the description centers on, so the description carries real weight by documenting the three school modes and their default. However, the many other configuration params (ayanamsa, timezone, houseSystem, zodiacType, etc.) are left entirely to the schema, so compensation is partial.

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 a specific verb+resource (Mangal Dosha detection) and scopes it to the Parashara school via the `school` parameter, which distinguishes it in spirit from the KP and Lal Kitab manglik siblings. It does not explicitly name those siblings, so an agent must infer the school boundary rather than being told.

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?

The text explains how to configure the `school` parameter but never states when to choose this tool over astroway_vedic_doshas_kp_manglik, lal_kitab_manglik, or compatibility_mangal_match. There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance for routing.

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?