AstroWay Vedic astrology

Prashna: chart of the question

astroway_vedic_prashna_chart

Read-onlyIdempotent

Prasna Marga chart for the moment and place of the question: sidereal Udaya Lagna and its navamsa, planets with dignity and combustion, whole-sign houses, Arudha (from arudhaSign 1-12, from number 1-108, or the Udaya Lagna when neither is sent) and its sphuta, Chatra (Veethi count, or the Udaya navamsa), Gulika (end of Saturn's part, with the start of the part beside it) and Mandi (ghatika table), Trisphuta, Chatussphuta and Panchasphuta. Every point carries its chapter and stanza. KP number charts 1-249 are /vedic/kp/horary.

[Group: Vedic] [Endpoint: POST /v1/vedic/prashna/chart] [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_prashna_chart"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`date`	Yes	Date of the question, YYYY-MM-DD, local.
`time`	Yes	Time of the question, HH:mm:ss, local.
`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.
`number`	No	A number 1-108 from the querent: its navamsa fixes the Arudha sign. Send arudhaSign or number, not both. KP's 1-249 number is /v1/vedic/kp/horary.
`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.
`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.
`arudhaSign`	No	Arudha: the sign (1 Aries .. 12 Pisces) of the direction the querent faces or the square of the chakra the querent touches (Prasna Marga II.7-11). Omit it and the Udaya Lagna stands in for it (IX.30-31).
`ayanamsaId`	No
`sphutaGulika`	No	Which point enters Trisphuta. mandi (default): the Prasna Marga author takes Gulika by the Mandi ghatika method (translator's note to V.14-16). gulika: the end of Saturn's eighth part.
`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
`day`	No
`mandi`	No
`notes`	No
`arudha`	No
`chatra`	No
`gulika`	No
`houses`	No
`method`	No
`planets`	No
`sources`	No
`sphutas`	No
`ayanamsa`	No
`udayaLagna`	No
`navamsaLagna`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 7, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare this a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive computation, so the safety bar is low. The description adds output-facing behavior — that every point carries its chapter and stanza citation, and the defaulting rule when neither arudhaSign nor number is sent — but says nothing about cost tier, failure modes, or how ayanamsa/timezone interact (that lives only in the schema).

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 purpose is front-loaded in the opening clause, which is good, but the body is one long run-on sentence enumerating a dozen technical outputs that the output schema already describes. The enumeration is dense and jargon-heavy rather than wasteful per se, yet a meaningful share of it duplicates structured data the caller already has.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With four required time/place parameters and an output schema present, the description needn't explain return values, yet it spends most of its length doing exactly that. The real gap is upstream: nothing tells the agent how this differs from prashna_analysis or prashna_number, which is the decision that matters for a 13-parameter, 20-credit call.

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 77%, so the baseline is 3 and the schema already documents most parameters thoroughly. The description's parameter content (arudhaSign 1-12, number 1-108, Udaya Lagna as fallback) largely restates what the schema already says, and it says nothing about fields, precision, ayanamsa, or timezone handling, which the schema covers on its own.

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 first clause names a specific technique and resource — a Prasna Marga chart cast for the moment and place of the question — and the rest enumerates the exact components produced (Udaya Lagna, Arudha, Chatra, Gulika, Trisphuta, etc.). It routes number-based KP work away to /vedic/kp/horary, giving partial sibling differentiation, but it never mentions the close siblings astroway_vedic_prashna_analysis or astroway_vedic_prashna_number, so an agent cannot fully disambiguate the Prashna family from this text alone.

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: the agent must infer this is the tool for a horary question with a known clock time and place. There is one explicit alternative routing ('KP number charts 1-249 are /vedic/kp/horary'), but no statement of when to prefer prashna_analysis, prashna_number, or horary_horary, and no prerequisites such as needing the exact moment of the question are spelled out.

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?