ProxyRange

Residential proxy provider facts and review

get_provider

Read-onlyIdempotent

Everything ProxyRange has on one residential proxy provider: checkout prices for 1, 10 and 100 GB, the smallest first purchase, whether unused traffic expires, ID check, trial, refunds, protocols, targeting, longest sticky session, claimed pool size, payment methods, what its terms say about independent testing, its sourcing check (Clear, Unclear or Concerning), brands it shares infrastructure with, and our review (best for, think twice if, pros, cons). Every fact carries the date it was checked and its source.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`provider`	Yes	Provider id, name or website, e.g. "iproyal", "Bright Data", "decodo.com" or a former name such as "Smartproxy"

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes
`name`	Yes
`page`	Yes	Its page on proxyrange.com: cite this
`trial`	Yes
`prices`	Yes
`review`	Yes
`idCheck`	Yes
`licence`	Yes
`refunds`	Yes
`testing`	Yes
`updated`	Yes	The newest date any fact in the data was checked (YYYY-MM-DD)
`website`	Yes
`formerly`	Yes
`needsMet`	Yes
`payments`	Yes
`notStated`	Yes
`protocols`	Yes
`targeting`	Yes
`attribution`	Yes	How to credit the data when you show it
`poolClaimed`	Yes
`sourcingCheck`	Yes	null: not yet reviewed
`trafficExpires`	Yes
`marketMedianUsd`	Yes
`minimumPurchaseUsd`	Yes
`stickySessionMaxMinutes`	Yes
`sharesInfrastructureWith`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed5 schema fields changedOct 28, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / sharesInfrastructureWith / items / properties / evidence

Added value: +{
+  "description": "What public DNS showed, with hostnames but never addresses",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / sharesInfrastructureWith / items / properties / firstSeen

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "description": "YYYY-MM-DD",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ]
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / sharesInfrastructureWith / items / properties / lastSeen

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "description": "YYYY-MM-DD",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "The last infrastructure map that still saw it"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / sharesInfrastructureWith / items / properties / page
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

changedOutput schema / properties / sharesInfrastructureWith / items / required

Previous value: -[
-  "id",
-  "name",
-  "how"
-]New value: +[
+  "id",
+  "name",
+  "page",
+  "how",
+  "evidence",
+  "firstSeen",
+  "lastSeen"
+]

First observedOct 28, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: every fact carries the date it was checked and its source, and the review is editorial (best for / think twice if / pros / cons). It does not say what happens when the provider is unknown or ambiguous.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

It is one front-loaded sentence with a clear lead-in and no filler, but the long field enumeration is partly redundant with the existing output schema and makes the sentence hard to scan. Trimming the return-value list would strengthen it.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not spell out return shape, yet it usefully flags provenance metadata (checked dates, sources) and the sourcing-check verdict scale. The main gap is the absence of sibling routing guidance among six related tools.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the single `provider` parameter already documents id, name, website and former-name forms with examples. The description adds nothing further about the parameter, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states precisely what the tool returns for a single residential proxy provider, and the enumerated fact list (prices, expiry, KYC, sourcing check, review) makes the resource unmistakable. It stops short of naming how it differs from siblings like sourcing_check or shared_infrastructure, which surface a subset of the same fields.

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?

"Everything ProxyRange has on one residential proxy provider" implies a single-provider deep-dive and therefore contrasts implicitly with compare_providers/find_providers, but no when-to-use or when-not condition is ever stated. An agent must infer the routing itself.

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

All ProxyRange 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.