Microburbs Australian Property Data

Suburb · Dwelling & population density

suburbs_development_density

Read-onlyIdempotent

Dwellings and people per km², plus the land area and counts behind them.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`suburb_name`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 15, 2026

changedOutput 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": "Dwelling and population density for a suburb, plus the land area and\ncounts behind it.\n\nTwo density measures ship together on purpose — they are computed on\ndifferent denominators and do not agree:\n\n* ``dwellings_per_km2`` / ``people_per_km2`` are the Microburbs\n  suburb-profile figures, and are what the Microburbs suburb report\n  headlines.\n* ``boundary_dwellings_per_km2`` / ``boundary_people_per_km2`` are the\n  plain whole-of-boundary ratios — exactly ``dwellings / area_km2`` and\n  ``population / area_km2``.\n\nThe profile figures are measured around the suburb's properties, not\nacross its whole polygon, so they differ from the boundary ratios in\neither direction (Belmont North: 1,002 vs 676; Bondi: 4,970 vs 6,193).\nPick the one that matches your question: profile density for \"how\nbuilt-up is the area people actually live in\", boundary density for\n\"how many dwellings per km² of suburb\".",
-          "example": {
-            "area_km2": 3.6314,
-            "area_level": "suburb",
-            "area_name": "Belmont North",
-            "boundary_dwellings_per_km2": 675.5,
-            "boundary_people_per_km2": 1729.4,
-            "density_level": "Mid",
-            "dwellings": 2453,
-            "dwellings_per_km2": 1002,
-            "people_per_km2": 2575,
-            "population": 6280
-          },
-          "properties": {
-            "area_km2": {
-              "anyOf": [
-                {
-                  "type": "number"
-                },
-                {
-                  "type": "null"
-                }
-              ],
-              "description": "Land area of the ABS SAL boundary in km², summed from the equal-area mesh-block areas ABS publishes.",
-              "title": "Area Km2"
-            },
-            "area_level": {
-              "description": "Always 'suburb'.",
-              "title": "Area Level",
-              "type": "string"
-            },
-            "area_name": {
-              "description": "Suburb (SAL) name.",
-              "title": "Area Name",
-              "type": "string"
-            },
-            "boundary_dwellings_per_km2": {
-              "anyOf": [
-                {
-                  "type": "number"
-                },
-                {
-                  "type": "null"
-                }
-              ],
-              "description": "`dwellings / area_km2` — the whole-of-boundary ratio.",
-              "title": "Boundary Dwellings Per Km2"
-            },
-            "boundary_people_per_km2": {
-              "anyOf": [
-                {
-                  "type": "number"
-                },
-                {
-                  "type": "null"
-                }
-              ],
-              "description": "`population / area_km2` — the whole-of-boundary ratio.",
-              "title": "Boundary People Per Km2"
-            },
-            "density_level": {
-              "anyOf": [
-                {
-                  "type": "string"
-                },
-                {
-                  "type": "null"
-                }
-              ],
-              "description": "Band the report labels `dwellings_per_km2` with: Low (<1,000), Mid (1,000–2,999), High (3,000+).",
-              "title": "Density Level"
-            },
-            "dwellings": {
-              "anyOf": [
-                {
-                  "type": "integer"
-                },
-                {
-                  "type": "null"
-                }
-              ],
-              "description": "Census dwelling count across the suburb's mesh blocks.",
-              "title": "Dwellings"
-            },
-            "dwellings_per_km2": {
-              "anyOf": [
-                {
-                  "type": "integer"
-                },
-                {
-                  "type": "null"
-                }
-              ],
-              "description": "Dwelling density from the Microburbs suburb profile — the figure the suburb report headlines. Measured around the suburb's properties, so it differs from `boundary_dwellings_per_km2`. Null for suburbs with no profile row (mostly rural / non-residential SALs).",
-              "title": "Dwellings Per Km2"
-            },
-            "people_per_km2": {
-              "anyOf": [
-                {
-                  "type": "integer"
-                },
-                {
-                  "type": "null"
-                }
-              ],
-              "description": "Population density from the same suburb profile, on the same denominator as `dwellings_per_km2`.",
-              "title": "People Per Km2"
-            },
-            "population": {
-              "anyOf": [
-                {
-                  "type": "integer"
-                },
-                {
-                  "type": "null"
-                }
-              ],
-              "description": "Census usual-resident population across the suburb's mesh blocks.",
-              "title": "Population"
-            }
-          },
-          "required": [
-            "area_name",
-            "area_level"
-          ],
-          "title": "SuburbDensity",
-          "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[SuburbDensity]",
-  "type": "object",
-  "x-fastmcp-top-level-schema": "ApiResponse_SuburbDensity_"
-}New value: +null

First observedSep 14, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful context about output composition (per km² values plus land area and counts), but it does not describe return structure, units beyond km², or any edge-case behavior. With annotations covering the main behavioral traits, this is adequate but not rich.

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 one concise sentence that front-loads the key metric ('Dwellings and people per km²') and then adds supporting output details. Every word contributes value; there is no redundancy or 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 simple one-parameter read-only tool, the description gives a reasonable high-level overview of what is returned. However, there is no output schema and no mention of the input parameter's role, validation rules, or how the result is structured, leaving some ambiguity for an agent deciding whether this tool fits the task.

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?

The schema has no description for suburb_name, and the tool description does not clarify what values are valid, whether it supports full names or codes, or that it is the lookup key. With 0% schema description coverage, the description needed to compensate and does not.

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 clearly identifies the resource: dwelling and population density per km² for a suburb, plus the land area and counts behind the figures. It is specific about the metric but does not explicitly state a verb like 'returns' or 'gets', and it does not differentiate itself from sibling tools beyond the metric focus.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as suburbs_development_profile or suburbs_demographics_all. There is no explicit context, prerequisite, or exclusion stated, so an agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name and title.

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?