Skip to main content
Glama

caelus-mcp

by io.github.heavyblotto

dasha

Vedic dasha periods — planetary time-lord cycles started from the Moon's birth nakshatra. system selects Vimshottari (120-year, the standard), Yogini (36-year, eight yoginis), or Ashtottari (108-year). Returns the period timeline (mahadasha → antardasha) with UTC start/end, the balance of the first period at birth, and — when target_date is given — the lords active then (Vimshottari also gives the pratyantardasha). Sidereal; Lahiri by default. Needs the birth time and place.

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.
levelsNodeepest timeline level: 1 (maha) or 2 (maha+antar, default)
systemNodasha system: vimshottari (120y), yogini (36y), or ashtottari (108y)vimshottari
zodiacNosidereal ayanamsa (default sidereal:lahiri); these are sidereal techniquessidereal:lahiri
target_dateNoUTC ISO date to read the active lords for; omit for the timeline only

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, description fully carries burden. It discloses return content (timeline with UTC dates, balance, active lords) and notes sidereal default. Could mention error handling or parameter constraints beyond schema, but is generally transparent.

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?

Description is concise (few sentences) and front-loads purpose. Each sentence adds value—purpose, system selection, return details, defaults, prerequisites. No wasted words.

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?

Covers key aspects: systems, output summary, and required inputs. Missing explicit output structure details (e.g., JSON format) but given no output schema, description provides adequate overview for a moderately complex tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds integrative context (e.g., target_date retrieves active lords, levels control depth) that helps understand parameter interplay, exceeding 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?

Description clearly states the tool computes Vedic dasha periods from the Moon's nakshatra, listing systems (Vimshottari, Yogini, Ashtottari) and distinguishing from sibling astrological tools like firdaria and transits.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Describes input requirements (birth time/place) and optional parameters (system, target_date). Lacks explicit exclusions or when-not-to-use compared to similar time-lord tools like firdaria, but context implies it is for dasha periods.

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