Skip to main content
Glama

Microburbs Australian Property Data

by au.com.microburbs
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Suburb · Sales summary (3-year count + median)

suburbs_sales_summary
Read-onlyIdempotent

Number of sales and median sold price in the suburb over the last 3 years.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
suburb_nameYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • 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": "3-year sales count and median sold price for the suburb.",
-          "example": {
-            "area_level": "suburb",
-            "area_name": "Belmont North",
-            "median_sold_price_3y": 965000,
-            "sales_count_3y": 155
-          },
-          "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"
-            },
-            "median_sold_price_3y": {
-              "anyOf": [
-                {
-                  "type": "number"
-                },
-                {
-                  "type": "null"
-                }
-              ],
-              "description": "Median sold price (AUD) across those sales.",
-              "title": "Median Sold Price 3Y"
-            },
-            "sales_count_3y": {
-              "description": "Number of recorded sales in the last 3 years.",
-              "title": "Sales Count 3Y",
-              "type": "integer"
-            }
-          },
-          "required": [
-            "area_name",
-            "area_level",
-            "sales_count_3y"
-          ],
-          "title": "SalesSummary",
-          "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[SalesSummary]",
-  "type": "object",
-  "x-fastmcp-top-level-schema": "ApiResponse_SalesSummary_"
-}New value: +null
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the description's main job was to add operational context. It does add the 3-year lookback window and the aggregate metrics, but it does not say how missing suburbs or absent sale records are represented.

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?

One concise, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states outputs first, then scope and time window, which is exactly the right structure for a one-parameter summary tool.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is simple: one required parameter, strong safety annotations, no output schema. The description supplies the return semantics that the missing output schema would otherwise need to carry, and the title reinforces the 3-year count + median framing. Units and response formatting are not spelled out, but they are not critical for a summary tool of this complexity.

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?

The sole parameter, suburb_name, is self-describing and the phrase 'in the suburb' connects it to the metrics. However, schema description coverage is 0% and the description does not explicitly state that the suburb name must be supplied or how it should be formatted, leaving a small gap.

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 names the resource (suburb) and the two output metrics (count of sales, median sold price) over a defined 3-year window. It lacks an explicit action verb and does not explicitly contrast itself with nearby tools such as suburbs_sales_recent or suburbs_market_median_sale_price, but the metric pair makes its purpose unambiguous.

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?

There is no when-to-use explanation or mention of alternatives. Given many sibling tools covering sales counts and median prices, the agent must infer from the tool name that this one aggregates both into a 3-year summary.

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 toolsInspect
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