astroway-mcp

Official

by astroway

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Remote

Dashas: Kalachakra Antardasha

astroway_vedic_dashas_kalachakra_antar

Read-onlyIdempotent

Calculates the nine Kalachakra Antardasha sub-periods within the running Mahadasha for a birth chart and target date, with each sub-period duration.

Instructions

Kalachakra Antardasha: 9 sub-periods of the running MD at targetDate (default today UTC). Same chakra-row at every depth; sub-period of sign Q within MD of P: years = (P.years × Q.years) / paramayu.

[Group: Vedic] [Endpoint: POST /v1/vedic/dashas/kalachakra/antar] [Cost: 20 credits (Tier 2)]

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`body`	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 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.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`level`	No
`system`	No
`initial`	No
`periods`	No
`ayanamsa`	No
`nakshatra`	No
`currentMaha`	No
`moonSiderealLongitude`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.6.0Oct 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, closed-world behavior. The description adds useful operational context absent from annotations: the POST endpoint, 20-credit Tier 2 cost, target-date default, and the proportional computation formula.

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?

The description is short, front-loaded, and structured: it states the result first, then the default and formula, followed by endpoint and cost metadata. Every sentence carries specific information.

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 the output schema and annotations, the description is largely complete for selection and invocation. The only minor gaps are the undefined `paramayu` term in the formula and the lack of explanation for the optional target time fields.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the nested birth-data and target fields are largely documented by the schema. The description adds meaning by clarifying that `targetDate` sets the running Mahadasha date and defaults to today UTC, though it does not explain `targetTime` or `targetTzOffset`.

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 resource and level: Kalachakra Antardasha, returning the 9 sub-periods of the running Mahadasha at `targetDate`. It is clearly distinguishable from the Mahadasha/Pratyantar/etc. siblings by the 'sub-periods of the running MD' phrasing, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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 context for use: query the running Mahadasha at a target date and get its Antardasha subdivisions, with a default of today UTC. It does not explicitly state when to choose this over the sibling Kalachakra depth tools, but the scope is sufficiently clear.

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

Deploy Server