Microburbs Australian Property Data

Suburb · Flood area coverage + optional polygon map

suburbs_risks_flood

Read-onlyIdempotent

Share of the suburb AREA covered by modelled flood overlays.

Area, not properties. For the share of DWELLINGS affected — the figure our own reports headline — use GET /v1/suburbs/{suburb_name}/risks/property-hazard-counts.

To answer where the flood zone is, pass geojson=true. The response then includes the actual modelled flood polygons clipped to the suburb boundary, suitable for a street map, plus truncation/simplification metadata. Do not infer street location from coverage_pct alone.

Price: 6¢ per call.

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_risks_flood"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`geojson`	No	When true, add a `geojson` FeatureCollection of the flood polygons clipped to the suburb boundary (default false — response unchanged).
`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": "One suburb-level risk record (bushfire or flood).\n\n`coverage_pct` is the share of the SAL covered by the modelled\nrisk overlay. `risk_band` is a coarse low/moderate/high band — only\npopulated for flood today; bushfire reports the raw percentage.",
-          "example": {
-            "area_level": "suburb",
-            "area_name": "Belmont North",
-            "coverage_pct": 45.72,
-            "name": "Bushfire",
-            "value_unit": "% of suburb area"
-          },
-          "properties": {
-            "area_level": {
-              "description": "Always 'suburb'.",
-              "title": "Area Level",
-              "type": "string"
-            },
-            "area_name": {
-              "description": "Suburb (SAL) name.",
-              "title": "Area Name",
-              "type": "string"
-            },
-            "coverage_pct": {
-              "description": "Share of suburb area inside the overlay (%).",
-              "title": "Coverage Pct",
-              "type": "number"
-            },
-            "geojson": {
-              "anyOf": [
-                {
-                  "additionalProperties": true,
-                  "type": "object"
-                },
-                {
-                  "type": "null"
-                }
-              ],
-              "description": "GeoJSON FeatureCollection of the hazard polygons for this layer, ST_Intersection-clipped to the suburb boundary and simplified for browser use. Present only when the request passes `?geojson=true`; absent (and the response byte-identical to before) otherwise.",
-              "title": "Geojson"
-            },
-            "geojson_meta": {
-              "anyOf": [
-                {
-                  "additionalProperties": true,
-                  "type": "object"
-                },
-                {
-                  "type": "null"
-                }
-              ],
-              "description": "Clip / simplify / truncation metadata for `geojson` (clip method, simplify tolerance, coordinate precision, feature cap, and whether the size cap truncated the output). Present only with `?geojson=true`.",
-              "title": "Geojson Meta"
-            },
-            "name": {
-              "description": "Risk overlay name — 'Bushfire' or 'Flood'.",
-              "title": "Name",
-              "type": "string"
-            },
-            "risk_band": {
-              "anyOf": [
-                {
-                  "type": "string"
-                },
-                {
-                  "type": "null"
-                }
-              ],
-              "description": "Coarse band — 'low' / 'moderate' / 'high'. Currently flood only.",
-              "title": "Risk Band"
-            },
-            "value_unit": {
-              "description": "Unit for coverage_pct — '% of suburb area'.",
-              "title": "Value Unit",
-              "type": "string"
-            }
-          },
-          "required": [
-            "area_name",
-            "area_level",
-            "name",
-            "coverage_pct",
-            "value_unit"
-          ],
-          "title": "SuburbRisk",
-          "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[SuburbRisk]",
-  "type": "object",
-  "x-fastmcp-top-level-schema": "ApiResponse_SuburbRisk_"
-}New value: +null

First observedSep 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare the read-only, idempotent, non-destructive profile, so the bar is lower. The description still adds real behavioral context the annotations cannot: a 6¢ per-call price, the fact that geojson=true changes the response shape and includes truncation/simplification metadata, and a caveat about not deriving location from coverage_pct. Missing are error/edge behavior (unknown suburb name, no flood zone present) and any detail on the base response beyond the coverage_pct field name.

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 the definition, then the sibling disambiguation, then the geojson behavior, then cost — a logical priority order with no filler. It is slightly denser than needed, with the 'Area, not properties' fragment and the bolded where clause carrying emphasis that the surrounding sentences already convey.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description covers the important return characteristics: coverage_pct in the default response and the added FeatureCollection plus truncation metadata when geojson=true. Together with the annotations and price disclosure, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly and interpret the result.

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?

Schema coverage is 50%: geojson is documented in the schema, but suburb_name has no description. The description compensates for geojson by explaining the payload effect (polygons clipped to boundary, truncation metadata) beyond what the schema states, but leaves suburb_name's expected format (name vs. ID, normalization) undefined in both places.

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?

Opens with a specific verb-and-resource statement: the share of suburb AREA covered by modelled flood overlays. It immediately contrasts with the dwelling-level figure and names the sibling endpoint (suburbs_risks_property_hazard_counts) that returns it, so an agent can distinguish the two without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives explicit routing rules: use this for area coverage, use property-hazard-counts for dwellings affected, and pass geojson=true when the question is 'where'. It also warns against inferring street location from coverage_pct alone, which is a concrete misuse condition.

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?