RoxyAPI Astrology MCP server

Official

by RoxyAPI

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Remote

Calculate planetary transits - Current transits with natal chart comparison

post_astrology_transits

Read-only

Calculate current or future planetary transits across 14 celestial bodies, and optionally compare them to a natal chart to reveal transit-to-natal aspects and timing.

Instructions

Calculate current or future planetary transits (positions of all bodies now). Optionally compare transits to natal chart to find transit-to-natal aspects. Returns all 14 celestial bodies (the 10 classical planets, the lunar nodes, Chiron, and Black Moon Lilith) with signs, degrees, and speeds. When natal chart provided, includes transit aspects (transiting Sun conjunct natal Mars, etc.) with orbs and applying/separating status. Perfect for daily transit forecasts, aspect alerts, and personalized transit reports.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	No	Transit date in YYYY-MM-DD format (defaults to current date)
`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`	No	Transit time in HH:MM:SS format (defaults to current 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.
`nodeType`	No	Lunar node convention. "mean" is the smoothed average node, which always moves retrograde; "true" is the osculating node, which tracks the real perturbed node, oscillates up to about 1.5 degrees either side of the mean on a 173-day cycle, and can briefly turn direct. Neither is more correct and they almost always fall in the same sign. Applies to the North and South Node. True is the osculating node and the default, because it is what most Western chart software reports; mean is the smoothed node preferred by several evolutionary schools, so pass "mean" to match one. Nothing else in the chart changes, and the two agree on the sign except when the node sits within about 1.8 degrees of a cusp. Defaults to "true".	true
`timezone`	No	Transit timezone: decimal hours from UTC OR IANA name (e.g. "America/New_York"). IANA resolved to the DST-correct offset for the transit date. Defaults to 0 (UTC).
`natalChart`	No	Optional natal chart data to compare transits against

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`summary`	No
`timezone`	Yes
`transitDate`	Yes
`transitTime`	Yes
`transitAspects`	No
`transitPlanets`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.1.2Oct 5, 2026
- changedInput schema / properties / natalChart / properties / timezone / example
```
Previous value: --5New value: +"America/New_York"
```
First observedv0.1.0Oct 4, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered by structured data. The description adds conditional behavior ('when natal chart provided, includes transit aspects with orbs and applying/separating status') and the body set returned, but since an output schema exists these return details are partly redundant and no auth/rate-limit context is given.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the core verb+resource, then output contents, then the conditional natal-chart behavior, then use cases. Mostly earns its place, though the enumeration of the 14 celestial bodies is slightly verbose given the output schema already lists them.

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 read-only annotations plus a full output schema and 100% schema coverage, the description is complete enough to invoke correctly: it clarifies scope (all bodies), the optional natal comparison, and the aspect output. Only the sibling differentiation is missing.

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% (date, time, timezone, lang, nodeType, compact, natalChart all documented in-schema), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no further parameter meaning, wording, or format details beyond what the schema already provides.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb+resource ('Calculate current or future planetary transits') and names the optional natal-chart comparison, so the agent knows exactly what the tool produces. However, it does not distinguish itself from close siblings like post_astrology_transit_aspects (aspect-only) or post_astrology_transits_monthly (date-range variant), which is the main ambiguity it leaves.

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?

It offers scenario hints ('Perfect for daily transit forecasts, aspect alerts, and personalized transit reports'), which imply when the tool is useful, but gives no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives guidance and no exclusions against the many transit/aspect siblings. Usage is implied rather than directed.

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

Deploy Server