Skip to main content
Glama

caelus-mcp

by io.github.heavyblotto

find_aspect_dates

Exact dates a transiting body makes an aspect, within a range: to a fixed longitude OR to another transiting body. Provide exactly one of target_lon / target_body. Includes retrograde re-hits. Body names are snake_case (mean_node, true_node).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
endYesUTC ISO end date (convert from local first); range <= 50 years
bodyYesTransiting body (snake_case, e.g. saturn, true_node)
startYesUTC ISO start date (convert from local first)
aspectYes
zodiacNoZodiac for body and target_lon longitudes; tropical (default) or sidereal:<ayanamsa>tropical
target_lonNoFixed natal longitude in degrees. Provide this OR target_body, not both.
target_bodyNoAnother transiting body. Provide this OR target_lon, not both.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'retrograde re-hits' which is a useful behavioral detail, but does not explicitly confirm it is read-only or describe what happens on boundary conditions (e.g., aspect exact multiple times). The description implies a query operation, which is adequate.

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?

The description is two sentences, extremely concise, and front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence provides essential information without redundancy.

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 the tool's complexity (7 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the essential constraints and behaviors. It could be slightly improved by specifying the output format (e.g., returning ISO date strings), but it still provides sufficient context for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 86%, and the description adds meaningful context beyond the schema: it explains the exclusive nature of target_lon and target_body, notes that body names are snake_case, and clarifies that the search includes retrograde re-hits. This adds value for correct parameter selection.

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 uses the specific verb 'find' and clearly identifies the resource: exact dates a transiting body makes an aspect within a range. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'aspect_patterns' by focusing on exact dates rather than patterns.

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?

The description provides clear input constraints such as providing exactly one of target_lon/target_body, converting dates to UTC, and a 50-year max range. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like 'transits' or 'aspect_patterns'.

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