astroway-mcp

Official

by astroway

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Remote

Rectification

astroway_prognostics_rectification

Read-onlyIdempotent

Rectify an approximate birth time by matching life events against transit and direction hits, narrowing the birth time window for accurate chart calculation.

Instructions

Rectify an approximate birth time using a list of life events and transit/direction hits to narrow the birth time window.

[Group: Prognostics] [Endpoint: POST /v1/rectification] [Required: baseInput, events] [Cost: 500 credits (Tier 6)] ⚠️ Heavy — confirm with user before invoking.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "baseInput": "<baseInput>",
      "events": "<events>"
    },
    "name": "astroway_prognostics_rectification"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`orb`	No
`events`	Yes
`methods`	No
`baseInput`	Yes	Birth data for a single natal chart. Required: date (YYYY-MM-DD), time (HH:mm:ss), latitude and longitude in decimal degrees. The short forms lat, lon, lng and tz are rejected with 400 INVALID_FIELD; pass the full names. timezoneOffset is hours from UTC and defaults to 0, meaning UTC; send timezone instead (an IANA name such as Europe/Kyiv, or auto) and the offset for that date is worked out, summer time included. city is a display label only: nothing here geocodes it, so it never stands in for coordinates. houseSystem is a single house-system letter, P by default; a name such as "Placidus" is refused, and the case matters because I and i are two different Sunshine systems.
`stepMinutes`	No
`searchRangeMinutes`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`candidates`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.6.1Nov 9, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / baseInput / description

Previous value: -"Birth data for a single natal chart. Required: date (YYYY-MM-DD), time (HH:mm:ss), latitude and longitude in decimal degrees. The short forms lat, lon, lng and tz are rejected with 400 INVALID_FIELD; pass the full names. timezoneOffset is hours from UTC and defaults to 0, meaning UTC; send timezone instead (an IANA name such as Europe/Kyiv, or auto) and the offset for that date is worked out, summer time included. city is a display label only: nothing here geocodes it, so it never stands in for coordinates. houseSystem is a single Swiss Ephemeris letter, P by default; a name such as \"Placidus\" is refused, and the case matters because I and i are two different Sunshine systems."New value: +"Birth data for a single natal chart. Required: date (YYYY-MM-DD), time (HH:mm:ss), latitude and longitude in decimal degrees. The short forms lat, lon, lng and tz are rejected with 400 INVALID_FIELD; pass the full names. timezoneOffset is hours from UTC and defaults to 0, meaning UTC; send timezone instead (an IANA name such as Europe/Kyiv, or auto) and the offset for that date is worked out, summer time included. city is a display label only: nothing here geocodes it, so it never stands in for coordinates. houseSystem is a single house-system letter, P by default; a name such as \"Placidus\" is refused, and the case matters because I and i are two different Sunshine systems."

Addedv1.6.0Oct 24, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare this a read-only, idempotent, closed-world computation, and the description is consistent with that. It adds behavior the annotations do not carry: the endpoint is a POST, and crucially the cost (500 credits, Tier 6) plus an explicit instruction to confirm with the user before invoking — the single most actionable piece of context for an expensive tool. It omits how long the search takes or how results are ranked, but the output schema covers returns.

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?

One front-loaded sentence states the operation, followed by a compact metadata block that earns its space by surfacing endpoint, required fields and cost. There is no filler or repetition. Slightly more structure around the tuning parameters would have been worth the extra words.

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?

This is a complex tool with nested objects and six parameters, four of which the schema leaves undocumented, so the description should do more. Return values are covered by the output schema and cost/safety is covered well here. But searchRangeMinutes, stepMinutes, orb and the method selection — the knobs that determine both cost and accuracy — are left entirely to the agent's guesswork.

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 17%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, and it largely does not. It mentions 'life events' and 'transit/direction hits', which loosely gestures at the methods toggles (primary/symbolic/progression), but orb, stepMinutes, searchRangeMinutes and methods are never explained — yet these control the search granularity and precision of the rectification and are exactly what an agent would need. Only the two required parameters are echoed from the schema.

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 a specific verb and resource — 'Rectify an approximate birth time' — and names the inputs (life events plus transit/direction hits) and the outcome (narrowing the birth time window). That is a concrete, distinguishable operation. It does not, however, explain how it differs from the closely named sibling astroway_prognostics_rectification_trutine, leaving one obvious ambiguity for an agent choosing between the two.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: you supply life events and direction/transit hits when the birth time is only approximate. The cost block adds a real operational rule — 500 credits, Tier 6, confirm with the user first — which is genuinely useful guidance. But there are no prerequisites (e.g., that events should span the life, or how many are needed for a meaningful narrowing) and no explicit when-not or alternative-tool routing.

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

Deploy Server