Skip to main content
Glama
arthiqlabs

Vedaksha

by arthiqlabs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Hybrid

compute_karakas

Read-only

Compute Jaimini Chara Karakas by ranking sidereal planet longitudes to identify Atmakaraka and Darakaraka, with optional 8-karaka Rahu scheme.

Instructions

Compute Jaimini Chara Karaka assignments from sidereal planet longitudes. Ranks planets by degrees within their current sign: highest = Atmakaraka (soul significator), lowest = Darakaraka (spouse significator). Supports 7-karaka (Sun–Saturn) and 8-karaka (adds Rahu) schemes.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sunYesSidereal longitude of Sun [0, 360)
marsYesSidereal longitude of Mars [0, 360)
moonYesSidereal longitude of Moon [0, 360)
rahuNoSidereal longitude of Rahu [0, 360). Required for scheme '8'.
venusYesSidereal longitude of Venus [0, 360)
saturnYesSidereal longitude of Saturn [0, 360)
schemeNoKaraka scheme: '7' (default, Sun–Saturn) or '8' (adds Rahu + Pitrikaraka)7
jupiterYesSidereal longitude of Jupiter [0, 360)
mercuryYesSidereal longitude of Mercury [0, 360)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
karakasYesOne entry per graha, ordered by rank.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv8.0.0
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "karakas": {
+      "description": "One entry per graha, ordered by rank.",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "degrees_in_sign": {
+            "description": "Degrees within the occupied sign, which is what ranks the grahas.",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "karaka": {
+            "description": "Chara karaka title, Atmakaraka through Darakaraka.",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "planet": {
+            "description": "Graha holding this karaka.",
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "planet",
+          "karaka",
+          "degrees_in_sign"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "karakas"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observedv7.0.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals a safe read operation, and the description adds substantive behavioral detail: planets are ranked by degrees within their sign, highest is Atmakaraka, lowest is Darakaraka, and the 7- vs 8-karaka schemes differ by the inclusion of Rahu. This goes beyond the annotation without contradicting it, though tie-breaking or edge-case behavior is not covered.

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?

Three tight sentences front-load the purpose, follow with the ranking rule, and end with scheme options. There is no filler and no repetition of schema content.

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 pure computation tool with readOnlyHint, a fully described schema, and an output schema, the description supplies the core algorithm and scheme semantics needed for correct invocation. It omits minor nuances like the Pitrikaraka label in scheme 8 or tie-breaking rules, but these are either captured in the schema or not essential to selecting and calling the 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?

The input schema already documents all nine parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description earns extra credit by explaining that longitudes are 'sidereal', that ranking uses degrees within the current sign, and that Rahu is the additional body for scheme 8 – giving meaning to the parameter values rather than merely naming them.

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 opens with the specific verb 'Compute' and the resource 'Jaimini Chara Karaka assignments', then anchors the computation to sidereal longitudes and rank-by-degree logic. This clearly differentiates the tool from sibling compute_* tools such as compute_natal_chart or compute_dasha, even though it never names them.

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 states the exact scope of the tool: computing Chara Karaka assignments and supporting two schemes, which implicitly tells an agent this is the karaka-specific tool among many compute siblings. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, so routing guidance is slightly incomplete.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools