Suburb · 12-month price growth
suburbs_hero_price_growth_12moRead-onlyIdempotent
12-month sale-price growth by property type (house / unit).
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| suburb_name | Yes |
Microburbs Australian Property Data
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Changed1 schema field changed
- changed
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": "12-month sale-price growth by property type.", - "example": { - "area_level": "suburb", - "area_name": "Belmont North", - "growth": [ - { - "field": "prop_list_price_0_5_growth_1_year_buy_house", - "pct": 12.3, - "property_type": "house" - } - ] - }, - "properties": { - "area_level": { - "description": "Always 'suburb' for these endpoints.", - "title": "Area Level", - "type": "string" - }, - "area_name": { - "description": "Suburb (SAL) name.", - "title": "Area Name", - "type": "string" - }, - "growth": { - "description": "One entry per property type with data.", - "items": { - "additionalProperties": true, - "description": "12-month growth for one property type.", - "example": { - "field": "prop_list_price_0_5_growth_1_year_buy_house", - "pct": 12.3, - "property_type": "house" - }, - "properties": { - "current_val": { - "anyOf": [ - { - "type": "number" - }, - { - "type": "null" - } - ], - "description": "DEPRECATED — no longer returned. `pct` now comes from the canonical published growth field rather than being re-derived from a median pair, and that field ships a rate with no current/previous values behind it. For medians use `/market/median-sale-price` and `/market/median-sale-price-series`.", - "title": "Current Val" - }, - "field": { - "anyOf": [ - { - "type": "string" - }, - { - "type": "null" - } - ], - "description": "Underlying smart-median field code.", - "title": "Field" - }, - "pct": { - "anyOf": [ - { - "type": "number" - }, - { - "type": "null" - } - ], - "description": "12-month growth as a percentage (17.83 = +17.83%).", - "title": "Pct" - }, - "prev_val": { - "anyOf": [ - { - "type": "number" - }, - { - "type": "null" - } - ], - "description": "DEPRECATED — no longer returned. See `current_val`.", - "title": "Prev Val" - }, - "property_type": { - "anyOf": [ - { - "enum": [ - "house", - "unit" - ], - "type": "string" - }, - { - "type": "null" - } - ], - "description": "'house' or 'unit' (derived from `field`).", - "title": "Property Type" - } - }, - "title": "HeroPriceGrowthRow", - "type": "object" - }, - "title": "Growth", - "type": "array" - } - }, - "required": [ - "area_name", - "area_level", - "growth" - ], - "title": "HeroPriceGrowth12mo", - "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[HeroPriceGrowth12mo]", - "type": "object", - "x-fastmcp-top-level-schema": "ApiResponse_HeroPriceGrowth12mo_" -}New value: +null
- First observed
TDQS
C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the property-type breakdown, but does not disclose response format, possible empty results, or calculation methodology. Since annotations carry the safety context, a 3 is appropriate for minimal added behavioral insight.
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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the core functionality. There is no redundant wording or filler. It is efficient and to the point, earning a top score for structure.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness2/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool has no output schema, so the description must explain what the return value looks like. It only states 'sale-price growth by property type' without specifying whether it returns a percentage, median price, or separate entries for house/unit. It also lacks details on error conditions or data availability. This leaves an agent uncertain about the exact response structure.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema has one parameter, suburb_name, with no description (schema coverage 0%). The tool description does not add any meaning for this parameter beyond its name. It does not clarify accepted formats, expected spelling, or how the parameter maps to the output. With zero schema coverage and no compensation in the description, this dimension scores poorly.
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 states it provides 12-month sale-price growth broken down by property type (house/unit). This is a specific resource and verb, and it is distinct from siblings like suburbs_market_price_growth_5y by the 12-month window. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other growth tools such as suburbs_market_price_growth, which might also cover similar metrics, so it falls short of a 5.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions, alternatives, or any context for selection. Given the large number of price-growth and market tools among siblings, this is a significant omission.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
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.