Web infrastructure for AI agents

Choose the capabilities your tools need. Get a ranked, explainable sample recommendation.

Independent measurementDemo dataFetchGauge probes · self-funded accounts · no vendor-supplied dataMethodology v2.3 →

Last tested

14 min ago · hourly

Sample size

n = 1,284 / run · 924,480 / 30D

Region

Tokyo (ap-northeast-1)

Test type

Scraping API · e-commerce workload

Configuration

JS off · 50 conc · 30s timeout · 3 retries

Targets

50 e-commerce domains

Simulated protocol · all figures and freshness timestamps are fixtures, not real measurements.

Optimize for

Browser API

MCP support

Structured extraction

Minimum concurrency

Rule-based ranking from sample data. Requirements filter the list; your priority determines the order. No LLM calls.

Top sample match

BBright Data

Provider details →

Success

98.4%

p50 latency

1.42s

Cost / 1k ok

$2.85

98.4% sample success; reliability 92/100.
1.42s p50 and 3.90s p95 sample latency.
$2.85 per 1,000 successful requests; 195 sample locations.

02Oxylabs97.8% · 1.31s · 90 rel.03ZenRows96.9% · 1.80s · 86 rel.04Apify95.7% · 2.10s · 81 rel.

Capability matrix

Provider	MCP	Browser	SERP	Extraction
Bright Data	●	●	●	●
Oxylabs	●	—	●	●
ZenRows	●	●	—	●
Decodo	—	—	●	—
Apify	●	●	●	●
ScraperAPI	—	—	●	—

Bright Data

MCP: ●
Browser: ●
SERP: ●
Extraction: ●

Oxylabs

MCP: ●
Browser: —
SERP: ●
Extraction: ●

ZenRows

MCP: ●
Browser: ●
SERP: —
Extraction: ●

Decodo

MCP: —
Browser: —
SERP: ●
Extraction: —

Apify

MCP: ●
Browser: ●
SERP: ●
Extraction: ●

ScraperAPI

MCP: —
Browser: —
SERP: ●
Extraction: —

Claude workflows →

Plan a narrow, observable web tool boundary.

MCP infrastructure →

Compare the sample providers with MCP support.