AstroWay Vedic astrology

Life-area timing: foreign travel and settlement

astroway_vedic_timing_foreign

Read-onlyIdempotent

Foreign travel and settlement windows from the 12th and 9th houses, their lords and Rahu, 3rd supporting; KP group 3, 9, 12. Most of these rules are modern conventions and say so in basis. Windows over years (1 to 20, default 5) from fromDate, cut at every Vimshottari period change (level pratyantar by default, or antar) and every Jupiter or Saturn sign change. Each window has score, its components (dasha, transit, kp) and every rule that fired, with basis (classical, modern, kp) and a source key into sources. Double transit (K.N.

[Group: Vedic] [Endpoint: POST /v1/vedic/timing/foreign] [Cost: 50 credits (Tier 3)]

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_timing_foreign"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`body`	Yes	Birth data (time and coordinates required: the houses come from the Lagna) and the span to scan for one life area.
`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
`area`	No
`level`	No
`natal`	No
`houses`	No
`method`	No
`window`	No
`karakas`	No
`sources`	No
`summary`	No
`windows`	No
`kpHouses`	No
`rulesBasis`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

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), and the description goes further: it discloses the scoring model (score plus dasha/transit/kp components), that modern conventions are labelled in `basis`, that windows are cut at every Vimshottari period change and every Jupiter or Saturn sign change, and that `kp` adds Placidus-cusp significators. It omits anything about window volume or response size, which the output schema partly covers.

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 and method are front-loaded in the first clause, then parameter behavior, then return structure, so a reader can stop early. It is dense with domain jargon and the final sentence about double transit is cut off mid-token ("Double transit (K.N."), which costs a point on structure.

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 an output schema present, the description does not need to enumerate return fields, and it correctly spends its words on the interpretive model and window-cutting logic instead. What is missing for a Tier-3, 50-credit call is any hint about result volume or when a narrower span would be cheaper.

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 every parameter is already documented in place, including years (1-20, default 5), fromDate, level (antar vs pratyantar) and minScore. The description restates defaults and paraphrases what `level` does without adding syntax, units, or edge cases beyond the schema, so it sits at the baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a concrete resource (foreign travel and settlement windows) and explains exactly which astrological factors produce them: the 12th and 9th houses, their lords, Rahu, the 3rd house as support, and KP groups 3, 9 and 12. That is enough to distinguish it cleanly from the other life-area siblings (timing_marriage, timing_career, timing_property, timing_all) without inspecting any schema.

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?

The description implies usage by describing the domain, but never states when to pick this over alternatives such as astroway_vedic_timing_all (all life areas at once) or the muhurta travel tools, which answer a different question (an auspicious departure date versus a multi-year settlement window). It also gives no prerequisites or cost/credit cue even though the call is billed at Tier 3.

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?