Skip to main content
Glama

Microburbs Australian Property Data

Suburb · Busy roads (noise)

suburbs_shapes_busy_roads
Read-onlyIdempotent

Shown in the suburb report as the 'Busy roads (noise)' map layer in the Risks section.

Busy-road line segments clipped to the suburb — the report's road-noise exposure proxy.

Price: 10¢ 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_shapes_busy_roads"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
geojsonNoWhen false, geometry is dropped — every Feature keeps its `properties` but its `geometry` is null. Use it to fetch the counts and per-feature attributes without the coordinates (default true — response unchanged).
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": "Busy-road segments (road-noise proxy) clipped to the suburb.",
      -          "example": {
      -            "area_level": "suburb",
      -            "area_name": "Belmont North",
      -            "count": 71,
      -            "geojson": {
      -              "features": [
      -                {
      -                  "geometry": {
      -                    "coordinates": [
      -                      [
      -                        151.66,
      -                        -32.99
      -                      ],
      -                      [
      -                        151.67,
      -                        -33
      -                      ]
      -                    ],
      -                    "type": "LineString"
      -                  },
      -                  "properties": {
      -                    "road_class": "primary"
      -                  },
      -                  "type": "Feature"
      -                }
      -              ],
      -              "type": "FeatureCollection"
      -            }
      -          },
      -          "properties": {
      -            "area_level": {
      -              "const": "suburb",
      -              "description": "Always 'suburb'.",
      -              "title": "Area Level",
      -              "type": "string"
      -            },
      -            "area_name": {
      -              "description": "Canonical ABS SAL name.",
      -              "title": "Area Name",
      -              "type": "string"
      -            },
      -            "count": {
      -              "description": "Number of road-segment features returned.",
      -              "title": "Count",
      -              "type": "integer"
      -            },
      -            "geojson": {
      -              "additionalProperties": true,
      -              "description": "GeoJSON FeatureCollection — line geometries of busy road segments clipped to the suburb boundary. Properties: `road_class` (OSM fclass, e.g. motorway/primary/secondary). Geometry is null on every Feature when the request passes `?geojson=false`.",
      -              "title": "Geojson",
      -              "type": "object"
      -            }
      -          },
      -          "required": [
      -            "area_name",
      -            "area_level",
      -            "count",
      -            "geojson"
      -          ],
      -          "title": "SuburbBusyRoads",
      -          "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[SuburbBusyRoads]",
      -  "type": "object",
      -  "x-fastmcp-top-level-schema": "ApiResponse_SuburbBusyRoads_"
      -}New value: +null
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world profile, so the bar is lower. The description adds real context beyond them: the per-call price of 10¢ and the fact that the output is clipped line geometry acting as a proxy measure, which matters for interpretation. It omits return-shape detail and any rate/credit-limit behavior, so it is not fully transparent.

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 identification of the layer and its report location, then a one-line substance statement and a bolded price line — no filler. Slightly redundant that the layer name repeats the title, but it anchors the report context.

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?

For a simple 2-parameter read with annotations and no output schema, the definition covers identity, provenance and cost. It is still missing two things an agent needs to call it correctly: the accepted format of suburb_name and any indication of what attributes ride along with each line feature (the geojson=false path advertises 'per-feature attributes' that are never described).

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is only 50%: the geojson flag is well documented in the schema itself, but suburb_name is bare and the description never explains how the suburb is matched (exact name, gazetteer lookup, fuzzy). With a half-documented schema, the description should have compensated for the unnamed required parameter and does not.

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 gives a concrete resource — busy-road line segments clipped to a suburb — and frames it as the road-noise exposure proxy, which separates it from the aircraft-noise and heatmap siblings. It stops short of naming an alternative tool explicitly, but the resource identity is unambiguous.

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?

Usage is implied through the report placement ('Risks section' of the suburb report), which tells an agent roughly the scenario it serves. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over suburbs_shapes_noise_heatmap or the aircraft-noise shape tools, and no stated exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources