Skip to main content
Glama
astroway

astroway-mcp

Official
by astroway

Nodal Axis Detail

astroway_evolutionary_nodal_axis_detail
Read-onlyIdempotent

Calculate North and South Node placements with rulers and conjunctions for evolutionary astrology analysis using birth date, time, and location.

Instructions

Full NN/SN with rulers + conjuncts.

[Group: Evolutionary Astrology] [Endpoint: POST /v1/evolutionary/nodal-axis-detail] [Required: date, time, latitude, longitude] [Cost: 10 credits (Tier 1)]

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cityNo
dateYes
nameNo
timeYes
ayanamsaNoSidereal school by name. Lahiri when omitted. Equivalent to ayanamsaId; send either.
latitudeYes
timezoneNoIANA zone name such as Europe/Kyiv, or auto to look the zone up from latitude and longitude. The server takes the offset that zone kept at this local date and time, summer time included, and uses it in place of timezoneOffset. A clock time that happened twice takes the first occurrence; one skipped when clocks went forward takes the offset from before the change. Abbreviations such as EST are refused. Before 1970 the tz database is not reliable for every place, so send timezoneOffset when the local clock is known.
cosmogramNo
longitudeYes
ayanamsaIdNo
zodiacTypeNo
houseSystemNoP
timezoneOffsetNoHours from UTC at the given moment, not minutes. Fractional zones are hours too: 5.5 for India, 5.75 for Nepal, -3.5 for Newfoundland. Defaults to 0, meaning UTC. Ignored when timezone is sent.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sourceNo
doctrineNo
northNodeNo
southNodeNo
disclaimerNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.6.0

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish that this is a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world operation. The description adds useful behavioral context with the endpoint, required inputs, and cost tier, but does not explain what the computation actually does with the optional settings.

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?

The description is short and front-loads the core output description, with metadata grouped into bracketed lines. The cryptic abbreviation slightly reduces clarity, but there is no wasted prose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists and annotations cover safety, so return values and mutability need less explanation. However, for a 13-parameter astrology computation, the description is missing guidance on the optional configuration parameters and when the tool is appropriate.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 23% across 13 parameters, and the description only repeats the four required fields already declared in the schema. It provides no meaning for optional parameters such as ayanamsa, zodiacType, houseSystem, cosmogram, city, or name.

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?

The description states the specific content produced: the full North Node/South Node axis with rulers and conjunctions. It is clearer than the bare title, though the 'NN/SN' abbreviation assumes astrology knowledge and it does not distinguish this from sibling evolutionary tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives no indication of when an agent should choose this tool instead of related evolutionary or nodal tools. It lists required inputs and an endpoint, but no use-case guidance or exclusions.

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