RoxyAPI Astrology MCP server

Official

by RoxyAPI

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Remote

Local space astrology map - Directional planetary compass lines

post_astrology_local_space

Read-only

Generate a local space map projecting natal planets onto the horizon as compass directions and great-circle lines for relocation and travel-direction planning.

Instructions

Generate a local space astrology map that projects the natal planets onto the local horizon as compass directions and great-circle lines radiating from the birthplace. Returns each body azimuth (degrees clockwise from true north), altitude, 16-point compass direction, whether it sits above the horizon, and the latitude and longitude waypoints of its directional line. Ideal for relocation planning, directional astrology, and travel-direction maps.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	Yes	Birth date in YYYY-MM-DD format. Combined with time and timezone it fixes the birth instant whose planetary positions are projected onto the local horizon.
`lang`	No	Response language (BCP 47). Supported: en, tr, de, es, hi, pt, fr, ru, zh-Hans, zh-Hant. Defaults to en. Coverage varies by domain, and a field with no translation in the requested language returns English.	en
`time`	Yes	Birth time in 24-hour HH:MM:SS format. Time is essential: the local horizon rotates a full circle each day, so the azimuth (compass direction) of every body depends on the exact birth time.
`compact`	No	Set true for the same data in a compact shape: arrays of same-shaped objects arrive columnar as {"__cols":[names],"__rows":[[values]]}. Lossless, typically 40 to 52 percent fewer tokens.
`include`	No	Optional comma-separated extra bodies to add beyond the 10 classical planets. Allowed values: north-node, chiron, lilith. north-node is the mean lunar node. Omit to return the 10 classical planets only.
`latitude`	Yes	Birthplace latitude in decimal degrees (-90 to 90). This is the origin point of every local space line and the observer latitude used to turn each body into an azimuth and altitude.
`timezone`	Yes	Decimal hours from UTC (e.g. -5 for EST, 5.5 for IST, 9 for JST) OR IANA name (e.g. "America/New_York"). IANA resolved to the offset in force at the birth date and time.
`longitude`	Yes	Birthplace longitude in decimal degrees (-180 to 180). Sets the local horizon orientation and the starting point from which the directional lines radiate.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`bodies`	Yes
`summary`	Yes
`birthDetails`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv1.1.2Oct 5, 2026

changedInput schema / examples

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "date": "1990-07-15",
-    "latitude": 40.7128,
-    "longitude": -74.006,
-    "time": "14:30:00",
-    "timezone": -5
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "date": "1990-07-15",
+    "latitude": 40.7128,
+    "longitude": -74.006,
+    "time": "14:30:00",
+    "timezone": "America/New_York"
+  }
+]

changedInput schema / properties / timezone / example

Previous value: --5New value: +"America/New_York"

First observedv0.1.0Oct 4, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safe-read profile is covered. The description adds the domain behavior (horizon rotation makes birth time essential) but discloses nothing about permissions, rate limits, or cost, and since an output schema exists the return-value enumeration is largely redundant.

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?

Two sentences, both earning their place: the first front-loads what the tool computes and returns, the second gives use cases. The opening sentence is dense but well-structured; nothing is filler or restated name/title boilerplate.

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 need not explain return values, and it adequately covers the computational contract and the five required inputs. The one remaining gap is sibling disambiguation against relocation/astrocartography tools, which matters given 39 overlapping astrology tools.

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% and every parameter (date, time, latitude, longitude, timezone, include, compact, lang) is documented in the schema itself, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description only hints that latitude/longitude are the 'birthplace' origin, adding no meaning beyond 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Generate a local space astrology map') and immediately specifies the mechanism (projecting natal planets onto the local horizon as compass directions and great-circle lines). It enumerates the concrete outputs (azimuth, altitude, 16-point compass direction, above-horizon flag, lat/long waypoints), so an agent knows exactly what this produces versus the broader family of chart tools.

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?

Gives clear use contexts ('Ideal for relocation planning, directional astrology, and travel-direction maps'), which is more than implied guidance. It does not, however, name or exclude the closely related siblings post_astrology_relocation_chart and post_astrology_astrocartography, so an agent has no explicit routing rule when several overlap.

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

Deploy Server