Microburbs Australian Property Data

suburbs_finder_fields

Every field you can filter / sort on, with its label and unit. 0c.

Houses and units are separate keys: the unit-prefixed ones (unitMedianPrice, unitGrossYield, unitMedianRent, …) are the apartment market, the unprefixed market keys are houses, and both can be filtered in the same query. Unit fields are NOT nationally populated — they only exist where a suburb has a unit market (roughly 13-54% of suburbs depending on the field), so a suburb with no unit market simply won't match a unit filter.

Price: 0¢ per call.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`data`	No	The endpoint's payload, or `null` when Microburbs has no value.
`reason`	No	Machine-readable slug naming the no-data condition (e.g. `no_avm_for_GANSW704074813`). Stable per endpoint. Omitted on success.
`message`	No	Human-readable explanation. Omitted on success.
`available`	No	`false` on no-data responses. Omitted on success — branch on `data !== null` if you want a single discriminator.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedSep 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It explicitly warns that unit fields are not nationally populated and only exist where a unit market exists, affecting query matches. It also states the price (0¢ per call), which is relevant for cost-sensitive agents. This is thorough for a metadata endpoint.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the main purpose, then explains the house/unit distinction and the coverage limitation, and ends with pricing. It is efficient and well-structured, though slightly verbose in the explanation of unit fields; it could be trimmed slightly without losing meaning.

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?

Given the output schema exists to list fields, the description covers the critical behavioral caveats (unit field coverage) and pricing. It is complete for a metadata endpoint with no parameters, providing everything an agent needs to understand the tool's output and its implications for querying.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds value by explaining the semantics of the field types (house vs. unit keys) and the coverage caveat, which is essential for agents to interpret the returned field metadata correctly.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Every field you can filter / sort on, with its label and unit.' It is specific and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like suburbs_finder_search, suburbs_finder_count, and suburbs_finder_regions by focusing on field metadata rather than actual search or counts.

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?

The description implies usage as a reference for available fields before constructing filter/sort queries, and it explains the house vs. unit key structure, which is critical for correct usage. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or state when not to use it, though the purpose is self-evident.

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?