Skip to main content
Glama

caelus-mcp

by io.github.heavyblotto

aspect_patterns

Classical aspect configurations in a chart: T-squares, grand trines, grand crosses, yods, kites, mystic rectangles, and stelliums by sign and by house. Each is a structured object with the participating bodies and the worst defining-aspect orb; T-squares and yods also name the apex, stelliums their sign or house. Reported patterns are maximal — a grand cross hides the T-squares it contains, a kite its grand trine. Pure geometry (engine orbs plus a quincunx for yods), no interpretation. Needs date, lat, lon.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
latYesLatitude, north positive
lonYesLongitude, EAST positive (Americas are negative)
dateYesUTC date-time, ISO 8601, e.g. 1990-06-10T14:30:00Z. Convert local birth time to UTC first.
zodiacNotropical (default) or sidereal:<ayanamsa>tropical
house_systemNoHouse system (default placidus). Case- and spacing-insensitive; valid: placidus, whole_sign, equal, porphyry, koch, regiomontanus, campanus, alcabitius, morinus, meridian, polich_page, vehlow (aliases like "whole sign" also work).placidus

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Without annotations, the description effectively explains key behaviors: maximal patterns (grand cross hides T-squares), orb usage ('worst defining-aspect orb'), and structured output like apex naming. It lacks an explicit statement about read-only nature but covers relevant details.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two concise sentences front-load the purpose and then detail behavioral nuances with zero wasted words. Every sentence adds essential value.

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 no output schema, the description adequately describes return structure (structured objects with bodies, orb, apex for some). It covers pattern selection rules and geometry. Missing perhaps an example or format spec, but sufficient for understanding.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description only repeats the need for date, lat, lon already in required fields, adding no new parameter meaning. Parameter details are sufficiently covered by the schema.

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 clearly identifies the tool as providing 'classical aspect configurations' listing specific patterns (T-squares, grand trines, etc.). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like chart_facts or natal_chart by focusing solely on these pattern definitions.

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 states the tool provides 'pure geometry, no interpretation' implying use when raw pattern data is needed. However, it does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool or mention alternatives among siblings.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All caelus-mcp toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a highly specific and well-described purpose. Despite the large number, their functions are clearly distinct—e.g., natal_chart vs current_sky vs composite, or dasha vs firdaria vs profections vs releasing. The detailed descriptions prevent ambiguity.

Naming Consistency3/5

Names are consistently in snake_case but vary in style: some are noun phrases (natal_chart, cosmic_weather), some are verb-like (releasing, returns), and some are descriptive (aspect_patterns, find_aspect_dates). There is no strict verb_noun pattern, leading to moderate consistency.

Tool Count4/5

34 tools is high but appropriate for a comprehensive astrology API covering natal, transits, progressions, returns, synastry, time-lord techniques, sky events, and synthetic bodies. Each tool serves a specific niche, so the count feels justified rather than excessive.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface is extremely thorough, covering all major areas of astrology: chart generation, aspects, configurations, dignities, time-lord techniques (multiple systems), synastry, composite, progressions, returns, transits, sky events, rectification, electional, and synthetic bodies. No obvious gaps for the intended domain.

Resources