Microburbs Australian Property Data

Suburb · Same-sex couples

suburbs_area_stats_same_sex_couples

Read-onlyIdempotent

How many couple families are same-sex couples, and what share of couples that is: male and female couples, and those raising children, for every sizeable suburb and council area.

Coverage: About 5,300 suburbs and localities and 512 council areas across Australia, in all states and territories (areas with fewer than 100 couple families are left out); one snapshot at 10 August 2021. Current to 2021-08-10. Full description, field list and method: /v1/datasets/same-sex-couples.

Price: 5¢ 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": {
      "suburb_name": "<suburb_name>"
    },
    "name": "suburbs_area_stats_same_sex_couples"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`to`	No	Last period to include, same formats as `from`.
`from`	No	First period to include: 2020, 2020-Q3, 2020-07 or 2020-07-01.
`fields`	No	Comma-separated subset of: couple_families_total, same_sex_couples_count, same_sex_couples_pct, male_same_sex_couples_count, male_same_sex_couples_pct, female_same_sex_couples_count, female_same_sex_couples_pct, same_sex_couples_with_children_count, same_sex_couples_with_children_pct, male_same_sex_couples_with_children_count, female_same_sex_couples_with_children_count. Omit for all.
`suburb_name`	Yes	Suburb name exactly as /v1/suburbs/list returns it, e.g. `Bondi` or `St Kilda (Vic.)`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: dataset size (5,300 suburbs, 512 council areas), a small-area exclusion threshold, the 10 August 2021 snapshot, and a 5¢ per-call price. It still says nothing about pagination, response shape, or how missing suburbs behave.

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?

Front-loaded with the question the tool answers, followed by tight coverage/price lines. Every sentence carries information; the backticked documentation path and price are compact and useful rather than filler.

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?

For a read-only dataset query with full schema coverage this is largely adequate — scope, snapshot date, exclusions and cost are all stated. However with no output schema, the description should more concretely indicate what a result row looks like beyond the implied counts and percentages.

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 100%, so from/to/fields/suburb_name are already documented and the baseline is 3. The description adds marginal value by naming the substantive measures (male, female, with children) that correspond to the fields parameter, but gives no extra syntax or format guidance.

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 opens with a specific question — counts and shares of same-sex couple families, split by male/female and by presence of children — plus the geographic grain (suburbs and council areas). It does not name the sibling lga_area_stats_same_sex_couples, so the suburb-vs-LGA distinction must be inferred from the coverage sentence.

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 only implied: the caller should use this for suburb/council-area same-sex couple statistics. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance, and no pointer to the parallel LGA tool, but the coverage statement (areas with fewer than 100 couple families excluded) does help an agent know when the tool will return nothing useful.

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?