suburbs_demographics_businessABN industry-mix pattern (Diverse / Professional-services-heavy / Mining-exposed / Low-commercial residential) plus the POI categories unusually common in the suburb, with named examples.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| suburb_name | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -{
- "properties": {
- "available": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "boolean"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ],
- "description": "`false` on no-data responses. Omitted on success — branch on `data !== null` if you want a single discriminator.",
- "title": "Available"
- },
- "data": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "additionalProperties": true,
- "description": "Local business mix — ABN industry pattern + distinctive POI categories.",
- "example": {
- "busiest_street_footnote": "On the busiest residential street, Croudace Bay Rd, the median house price sits at $890k.",
- "distinctive_categories": [
- {
- "category": "Takeaway",
- "count": 6,
- "examples": [
- "Golden Wok",
- "Belmont North Pizza"
- ],
- "times_more_common": 4.9
- }
- ],
- "industries": [
- {
- "industry": "trade_construction",
- "label": "Trades & construction",
- "n": 143,
- "share": 0.21
- }
- ],
- "pattern": {
- "headline": "Mostly residential — too few businesses to identify a market pattern.",
- "label": "Low-commercial residential",
- "subline": "The local business mix below shows what is distinctive in this suburb regardless."
- },
- "suburb": "Belmont North"
- },
- "properties": {
- "busiest_street_footnote": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ],
- "description": "Busiest-residential-street context sentence.",
- "title": "Busiest Street Footnote"
- },
- "distinctive_categories": {
- "description": "POI categories unusually common here (up to 4).",
- "items": {
- "additionalProperties": true,
- "description": "A POI category unusually common in this suburb.",
- "properties": {
- "category": {
- "description": "Category name (title-cased).",
- "title": "Category",
- "type": "string"
- },
- "count": {
- "description": "POIs of this category in the suburb.",
- "title": "Count",
- "type": "integer"
- },
- "examples": {
- "description": "Up to 3 named example POIs.",
- "items": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "title": "Examples",
- "type": "array"
- },
- "times_more_common": {
- "description": "How many times more common than the national base rate.",
- "title": "Times More Common",
- "type": "number"
- }
- },
- "required": [
- "category",
- "count",
- "times_more_common",
- "examples"
- ],
- "title": "DistinctiveCategory",
- "type": "object"
- },
- "title": "Distinctive Categories",
- "type": "array"
- },
- "industries": {
- "description": "Top ABN industries by share (up to 5).",
- "items": {
- "additionalProperties": true,
- "description": "One ABN industry share row.",
- "properties": {
- "industry": {
- "description": "Industry key (e.g. trade_construction).",
- "title": "Industry",
- "type": "string"
- },
- "label": {
- "description": "Human industry label.",
- "title": "Label",
- "type": "string"
- },
- "n": {
- "description": "ABN count in the industry.",
- "title": "N",
- "type": "integer"
- },
- "share": {
- "description": "Share of classified ABNs (0-1).",
- "title": "Share",
- "type": "number"
- }
- },
- "required": [
- "industry",
- "label",
- "share",
- "n"
- ],
- "title": "BusinessIndustry",
- "type": "object"
- },
- "title": "Industries",
- "type": "array"
- },
- "pattern": {
- "additionalProperties": true,
- "description": "Business-mix pattern.",
- "properties": {
- "headline": {
- "description": "One-line market read for the pattern.",
- "title": "Headline",
- "type": "string"
- },
- "label": {
- "description": "Pattern tag: Diverse / Professional-services-heavy / Mining-exposed / Low-commercial residential.",
- "title": "Label",
- "type": "string"
- },
- "subline": {
- "description": "Context sentence (may be empty).",
- "title": "Subline",
- "type": "string"
- }
- },
- "required": [
- "label",
- "headline",
- "subline"
- ],
- "title": "BusinessPattern",
- "type": "object"
- },
- "suburb": {
- "description": "Canonical SAL name.",
- "title": "Suburb",
- "type": "string"
- }
- },
- "required": [
- "suburb",
- "pattern",
- "industries",
- "distinctive_categories"
- ],
- "title": "SuburbBusiness",
- "type": "object"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ],
- "description": "The endpoint's payload, or `null` when Microburbs has no value."
- },
- "message": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ],
- "description": "Human-readable explanation. Omitted on success.",
- "title": "Message"
- },
- "reason": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ],
- "description": "Machine-readable slug naming the no-data condition (e.g. `no_avm_for_GANSW704074813`). Stable per endpoint. Omitted on success.",
- "title": "Reason"
- }
- },
- "title": "ApiResponse[SuburbBusiness]",
- "type": "object",
- "x-fastmcp-top-level-schema": "ApiResponse_SuburbBusiness_"
-}New value: +nullDoes the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower here. The description adds useful context by naming the ABN data source and the nature of the output, but it does not disclose limitations such as ABN data lag, coverage gaps, or behavior for unknown suburbs. It adds some value beyond annotations without contradicting them.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single dense sentence with no filler. It front-loads the ABN industry-mix pattern and then adds the POI component, with each phrase contributing distinct information. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simple input surface.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the one-parameter input and no output schema, the description covers the main expected output components: the ABN pattern categories and unusually common POI categories with examples. It does not specify the exact response shape or how examples are presented, but for a tool of this complexity the description is largely sufficient. It would benefit from a note about what happens when the suburb cannot be found or the data is sparse.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate for the undocumented parameter, but it never mentions suburb_name or any expected format or example. The single string parameter is inferable from context, but the description itself adds no parameter-level meaning. This is a clear gap under the low-coverage rule.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly identifies the resource (a suburb's local business mix) and names the output components: an ABN industry-mix pattern with four possible labels, plus unusually common POI categories with named examples. This differentiates it from sibling demographics tools like age, income, and voting. It lacks an explicit verb such as 'returns', but the output-oriented phrasing is unambiguous.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description does not state when to prefer this tool over any sibling, nor does it mention preconditions like needing a valid suburb_name or checking suburbs_list first. It does not offer alternatives or exclusions, leaving usage context entirely implicit. This is a thin area for an API with many closely related suburb tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.