NSW Planning Data (x402)

Request data that is not covered yet

request_data

Request Australian data that these tools do not provide yet (another state, dataset, field or filter), so the maintainers can consider it for a future release. Free. Describe the data and, optionally, the task it is for. Do not include personal information. Requests are stored anonymously and read by the maintainers; the result is only a confirmation.

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": {
      "request": "<request>"
    },
    "name": "request_data"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`request`	Yes	The data you need, e.g. 'development applications in Victoria' or 'sale prices'
`use_case`	No	Optional: the task you need it for

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false), so the description adds real value: it discloses that the service is free, that requests are stored anonymously and read by maintainers, and that the only return value is a confirmation. That last point is important because there is no output schema. It does not mention rate limits or turnaround expectations, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then inputs, then the privacy constraint, then the response behavior. Nothing is redundant, and the terse 'Free.' fragment carries decision-relevant information rather than filler.

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?

For a two-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description covers everything needed: what to send, what not to send (personal information), what happens to the data, and that the response is only a confirmation. Nothing an agent needs in order 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 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description still adds meaning by framing the two fields as 'describe the data' plus an optional 'task it is for', and by imposing a content constraint the schema lacks — no personal information. That constraint directly governs what may be written into the string parameters, which is genuine guidance beyond the schema text.

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?

The description gives a specific verb and resource ('Request Australian data'), and crucially scopes it to data 'these tools do not provide yet (another state, dataset, field or filter)'. That scope immediately separates it from every sibling, which are all NSW data-retrieval tools — an agent can tell this is a maintainer feedback channel, not a data query.

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?

The when-to-use condition is explicit and acts as a fallback routing rule: invoke this when a state, dataset, field or filter is not covered by the existing tools. It also states the request should describe the data and optionally the task. It does not enumerate which sibling to try first or what to do if a sibling partially covers the need, but the fallback semantics are unambiguous.

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

All NSW Planning Data (x402) 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?