RoxyAPI Astrology MCP server

Official

by RoxyAPI

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Remote

Monthly Transits - Tropical sign ingresses for an entire month

post_astrology_transits_monthly

Read-only

Generate monthly tables of all tropical sign changes and ingresses for 14 Western bodies, with dates and times in your timezone. Use for transit calendars, forecasts, newsletters.

Instructions

Get every tropical sign change for a given month, for all 14 Western bodies: the Sun through Pluto, both lunar nodes, Chiron and Black Moon Lilith. Returns the starting sign of each body on the first of the month and then each ingress with its exact date and time in your timezone. Omit year and month to get the month in progress, so a published transit calendar stays current without a redeploy. Essential for transit calendars, monthly forecast copy, retrograde and ingress tracking, and newsletter automation. Monthly transit API, planetary ingress calendar, sign change dates, tropical transit table. Verified against NASA JPL Horizons, with the four cardinal ingresses cross-checked against published equinox and solstice times.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`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
`year`	No	Year for the monthly transit table (1551 to 2649). Defaults to the current year (UTC).
`month`	No	Month number (1-12). Defaults to the current month (UTC).
`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	Timezone: an IANA name (e.g. "America/New_York", "Europe/London", or `cities[0].timezone` from /location/search) or decimal hours from UTC (e.g. -5 for EST, 5.5 for IST). An IANA name is resolved once, at the start of the window, and that offset applies to every time in the response. Ingress dates and times are reported in this zone, which is what makes a published calendar read correctly for its audience. Defaults to 0 (UTC).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`year`	Yes
`month`	Yes
`timezone`	Yes
`transitEvents`	Yes
`startingPositions`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 4, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare this as a safe read (readOnlyHint true, destructiveHint false), so the bar is lower, and the description still adds real behavior: each body's starting sign on the first of the month, each ingress with exact date and time in the caller's timezone, and defaulting to the in-progress month. It adds no notes on rate limits, auth, or data freshness beyond the JPL verification claim.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The core behavior is front-loaded in the first two sentences, but the description then packs in a use-case list and a keyword string ('Monthly transit API, planetary ingress calendar, sign change dates, tropical transit table') that reads as SEO filler rather than agent guidance. The NASA JPL verification sentence adds trust but is not needed to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

For a six-parameter, zero-required, read-only tool with full schema coverage and an output schema, the description supplies scope, default-window behavior, and timezone implications, which is enough for correct invocation. The trailing trust/verification and keyword material is surplus rather than a missing piece.

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%, so the schema already documents year, month, timezone, lang, compact, and nodeType thoroughly. The description restates the timezone semantics ('in your timezone') and the year/month omission default, which is useful but largely duplicative of the schema text, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

It names a specific verb and resource ('every tropical sign change for a given month') and enumerates the scope of bodies (Sun through Pluto, both nodes, Chiron, Black Moon Lilith), which cleanly separates it from post_astrology_transits and post_astrology_aspects_monthly. An agent can identify this as the ingress/calendar tool without opening the schema.

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?

It gives clear triggering contexts ('transit calendars, monthly forecast copy, retrograde and ingress tracking, newsletter automation') and explains the omit-year/month behavior that keeps a published calendar current. It never explicitly names a sibling alternative such as post_astrology_transits for non-ingress transit data, so the when-not guidance is only implied by the scope wording.

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

Deploy Server