Microburbs Australian Property Data

Income by mesh block — household, personal and family incomes, salaries (by suburb)

suburbs_mesh_blocks_income

Read-onlyIdempotent

How much do people here earn? For every mesh block in the suburb: median household, personal and family income for the surrounding area, and salary, deductions and tax for the postcode.

One entry per mesh block in the suburb under mesh_blocks, each with its mb_code, population and dwellings. Values only — the matching polygons come from /shapes/mesh-blocks.

Every field carries provenance — measured (at this block), measured_wider_area (measured for the SA1 or postcode and repeated on every block in it), estimate (our model) or not_recorded (not labelled yet) — plus how, one sentence on how the number was arrived at (empty when not_recorded).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "suburb_name": "<suburb_name>"
    },
    "name": "suburbs_mesh_blocks_income"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`suburb_name`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish that this is a safe, idempotent, closed-world read, so the description correctly spends its words elsewhere: it explains the response envelope (`mesh_blocks` with `mb_code`, `population`, `dwellings`) and the four `provenance` states plus the `how` sentence. That provenance taxonomy is meaningful behavioral context an agent cannot get from the annotations or schema. It stops short of saying what happens for an unknown suburb or whether results are ordered/paginated.

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?

Front-loaded with a bolded question, then response shape, then a compact provenance glossary. Every sentence carries information; the only soft spot is the long list of income types embedded mid-sentence, which could be a bullet but reads fine.

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?

With no output schema, the description does well to sketch the response and provenance semantics, but it omits a materially important detail: the units and period of the income/salary/tax values (weekly vs annual, dollar units). For a numeric data tool that omission can lead to misreported figures.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0% for the single `suburb_name` string, so the description bears the burden, yet it only implicitly confirms the parameter is a suburb name rather than a code. It adds no format, matching, or fallback guidance (e.g. fuzzy match, what to do when ambiguous).

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?

States a specific question and resource: income figures (household, personal, family, salary, deductions, tax) for every mesh block in a named suburb. It also disambiguates from the geometry-taking sibling by noting that polygons come from `/shapes/mesh-blocks`, though it never names the suburb-level income sibling it differs from.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Scope (one entry per mesh block in the suburb) is implied clearly, and the pointer to a separate shapes tool is genuinely useful routing. But there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over `suburbs_demographics_income` or the other `suburbs_mesh_blocks_*` tools, and no prerequisites about needing a valid suburb name.

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?