Skip to main content
Glama

NSW Development Applications (x402)

Find NSW complying development certificates (CDCs) within 2 km of a street address or latitude/longitude, nearest first.

nsw_cdc_search_nearby_applications
Read-onlyIdempotent

Find NSW complying development certificates (CDCs) within 2 km of a street address or latitude/longitude, nearest first. Pass address (e.g. '10 Brigalow Ave, Casula') and it is geocoded against the official NSW address register, or pass lat and lng. Returns the distance in metres for each result plus the same fields as search_applications; meta.geocode shows the matched address. An unknown or ambiguous address returns an error with suggestions and is not charged. lodged_from limits results to recent applications. Costs $0.02 per call, paid via x402 in USDC on Base; clients without x402 support receive the payment requirements as an error result. Failed calls are not charged. Source: NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure (NSW Planning Portal), CC BY 4.0.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
latNoLatitude (WGS84); required unless address is given (e.g. -33.81)
lngNoLongitude (WGS84); required unless address is given (e.g. 151.06)
limitNoMax results, 1-100 (default 20)
addressNoNSW street address with suburb; alternative to lat/lng (e.g. 10 Brigalow Ave, Casula NSW 2170)
radius_mNoRadius in metres, 1-2000 (default 500)
lodged_fromNoLodgement date lower bound, yyyy-mm-dd

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNoResult: a list of applications for search and nearby tools, one record or summary object otherwise
metaYesPaging and query details, e.g. limit, offset, has_more, count
attributionYesSource attribution; keep it when presenting the data

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already establish the safe read-only, idempotent profile, and the description goes well beyond them: geocoding against the official NSW address register, meta.geocode in the response, unknown/ambiguous address errors with suggestions that are not charged, $0.02 per-call x402 USDC-on-Base payment with unpaid clients receiving payment requirements as an error, and no charge for failed calls. This is unusually rich behavioral disclosure.

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 core action and scope, then packs input modes, return shape, error behavior, pricing, and provenance into a few dense sentences. Slightly long, but nearly every clause carries operational information an agent needs.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no elaboration, and the description still covers geocoding behavior, response meta, error semantics, cost/payment mechanics, and data source/licensing. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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 already 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description still adds meaning by explaining that address is geocoded rather than matched literally, that lat/lng is the alternative, and that lodged_from restricts to recent applications. It does not clarify limit/radius_m semantics (radius_m default 500 vs the '2 km' phrasing) beyond what the schema states.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Find NSW complying development certificates (CDCs)') plus the scope (within 2 km, nearest first). This clearly separates it from nsw_cdc_search_applications and nsw_cdc_get_application without needing to open a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly gives the two input modes (address, which is geocoded, or lat/lng) and explains what lodged_from does. It references search_applications only for field parity rather than routing the agent away from this tool when a radius search is not wanted, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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