Microburbs Australian Property Data

Property · Signals by mesh block — recent price growth and turnover within 1 km (by gnaf_id) (beta)

properties_mesh_blocks_signals

Read-onlyIdempotent

Beta. The figures behind this topic have not been validated against an independent source, so it is not sold at the same confidence as the other mesh-block topics. Every response says beta: true and carries a beta_notice.

Is this block moving? For every mesh block around the property: recent price growth on the block against its suburb, long-run house value growth, and the share of properties recently listed for rent.

One entry per mesh block within 1,000 m of the property under mesh_blocks, nearest first, each with its mb_code, distance_m, population and dwellings. Blocks across suburb lines are included. Values only — the polygons come from /properties/{gnaf_id}/context/mesh-blocks.

Every field carries provenance — measured (at this block), measured_wider_area (measured for the SA1 or postcode and repeated on every block in it), estimate (our model) or not_recorded (not labelled yet) — plus how, one sentence on how the number was arrived at (empty when not_recorded).

Price: 20¢ per call.

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": {
      "gnaf_id": "<gnaf_id>"
    },
    "name": "properties_mesh_blocks_signals"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`gnaf_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the read-only/idempotent/non-destructive profile, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: beta status and the fact that every response carries beta: true and beta_notice, the 1,000 m radius, nearest-first ordering, inclusion of blocks across suburb lines, a four-value provenance taxonomy with a definition for each, and a 20¢ per-call cost.

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?

Content is front-loaded with the beta caveat and the core question, then moves to payload shape and provenance semantics; nearly every sentence carries information. The heavy bold/markdown formatting and some repeated framing of the beta caveat add modest noise.

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

Completeness5/5

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

With no output schema and no annotation hints about returns, the description fully carries the burden: it enumerates the response envelope (mesh_blocks), the per-entry fields (mb_code, distance_m, population, dwellings plus the signal values), ordering, and provenance semantics. An agent has everything needed to call and interpret it correctly.

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 0%, so the single gnaf_id parameter is documented nowhere in structured data. The description implies it identifies a property (and shows it in a URL path elsewhere), but never states format, source, or example values, so it only partially compensates for the schema gap.

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?

States a specific verb-like purpose and resource: per-mesh-block price growth vs suburb, long-run house value growth, and rental listing share for blocks within 1 km of a property. It also explicitly disambiguates from the sibling that serves polygons via /properties/{gnaf_id}/context/mesh-blocks, so an agent can choose without opening either 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?

Frames the use case ("Is this block moving?") and points to the alternative tool for polygon geometry, which is a real routing decision. It does not give explicit exclusions against the many other mesh-block sibling topics (rent, forecast, condition), so the agent must still infer those boundaries.

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

All Microburbs Australian Property Data tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?