Get pricing
get_pricingPrices per GB (USD) for residential / mobile / datacenter proxies.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
get_pricingPrices per GB (USD) for residential / mobile / datacenter proxies.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds what the payload contains (USD, per-GB, three proxy tiers), but says nothing about whether rates are static or current.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
One short fragment, front-loaded with the key fact (unit, currency, resource) and no filler. Slightly telegraphic but nothing wasted.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a zero-param lookup with no output schema, the description adequately communicates return content. It could note currency refreshing or that results cover all offered tiers, but it is sufficient to call correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there is nothing for the description to disambiguate, and schema coverage is 100%.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific resource and scope: per-GB USD prices for three proxy categories. An agent can distinguish it from get_usage and buy_proxy, though no sibling is named explicitly.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives like buy_proxy or get_usage, and no statement that it takes no arguments. Usage is only inferable from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.