suburbs_market_vacancy_rateSuburb-wide rental vacancy rate by property type, as a decimal fraction
(0.00842 = 0.84%). Use /market/vacancy-map for the per-mesh-block surface.
| 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": "Suburb headline rental vacancy rate, by property type.",
- "example": {
- "area_level": "suburb",
- "area_name": "Belmont North",
- "as_of": "2026-06-28",
- "house": {
- "areas": 28,
- "rank": 9,
- "value": 0.00842
- }
- },
- "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"
- },
- "as_of": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ],
- "description": "Date of the most recent observation (YYYY-MM-DD).",
- "title": "As Of"
- },
- "house": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "description": "A published figure with its position among peer suburbs.",
- "properties": {
- "areas": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "integer"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ],
- "description": "Size of the peer group the rank is out of.",
- "title": "Areas"
- },
- "rank": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "integer"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ],
- "description": "Position among peer areas (1 = highest).",
- "title": "Rank"
- },
- "value": {
- "description": "The figure itself.",
- "title": "Value",
- "type": "number"
- }
- },
- "required": [
- "value"
- ],
- "title": "RankedValue",
- "type": "object"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ],
- "description": "House vacancy rate as a DECIMAL fraction (0.00842 = 0.84%), with peer rank."
- },
- "unit": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "description": "A published figure with its position among peer suburbs.",
- "properties": {
- "areas": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "integer"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ],
- "description": "Size of the peer group the rank is out of.",
- "title": "Areas"
- },
- "rank": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "integer"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ],
- "description": "Position among peer areas (1 = highest).",
- "title": "Rank"
- },
- "value": {
- "description": "The figure itself.",
- "title": "Value",
- "type": "number"
- }
- },
- "required": [
- "value"
- ],
- "title": "RankedValue",
- "type": "object"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ],
- "description": "Unit vacancy rate as a DECIMAL fraction, with peer rank."
- }
- },
- "required": [
- "area_name",
- "area_level"
- ],
- "title": "VacancyRate",
- "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[VacancyRate]",
- "type": "object",
- "x-fastmcp-top-level-schema": "ApiResponse_VacancyRate_"
-}New value: +nullDoes the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows it's a safe read. The description adds the decimal fraction format (with example), which is useful. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as response structure, pagination, or whether the rate is current or historical. The description does not contradict annotations, but it adds minimal behavioral context beyond the format.
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 two sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the core purpose (suburb-wide vacancy rate), then provides format details and a disambiguation. It is concise and easily scannable.
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 tool has one simple parameter and no output schema, the description should cover all necessary context. It details the output format but does not explain what the single parameter should be (e.g., accepts suburb name exactly as in `suburbs_list`?). It also does not mention if there are any constraints on the data (e.g., only for residential properties). It is adequate for a simple tool but not fully complete.
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%, and there is only one parameter `suburb_name`. The description does not explain the format or constraints of `suburb_name` (e.g., exact case, spaces, need for full name). With 0% coverage, the description should provide more detail but only mentions the return format. This is a gap.
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 states the tool returns a suburb-wide rental vacancy rate by property type, as a decimal fractionched with an example. It distinguishes itself from the sibling `suburbs_market_vacancy_map` by explicitly clarifying that the map tool returns a per-mesh-block surface, not the suburb headline. This makes it different from siblings in the market group.
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 explicitly tells the agent when to use the map tool instead for mesh-block level data, which acts as a when-not clause. It does not explicitly state when to use this tool, but the context makes it clear that this is for suburb-level analysis. This is clear guidance but could be slightly more explicit about prerequisites or scenarios (e.g., need for historical series).
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.