Skip to main content
Glama

pulsenetwork

by com.theaslangroupllc.pulse

airdroppulse

AirdropPulse: Machine-readable airdrop/points-campaign and concentrated-liquidity (LP) analytics, sold per-call via x402 micropayments (USDC on Base plus additional networks) — no API keys, agents pay programmatica

Coverage: Global

Endpoints: • pool-ev ($0.15): Points-per-$1k-TVL-per-day ranking of every eligible GigaDex pool • campaign-status ($0.05): GigaDex points campaign clock, emission math, hypothetical value-per-point scenarios • position-audit ($0.10): Points earned, share, in-range status and projection for a position or account • entry-guide ($0.10): How to participate: contracts, eligible pools, mechanics, GIGA Protect + fake-token warnings • range-model ($0.25): Realized-vol range scenario table for a GigaDex pool • il-forecast ($0.15): Impermanent-loss vs fees scenario table across price moves for a pool + range • position-health ($0.05): In-range status, % through band, edge distances, pending fees — the cheap monitoring poll • rebalance-check ($0.10): Current range vs recentered range, side-by-side scenario comparison • launch-check ($0.05): Launch provenance verdict for a LONG.xyz / Doppler token on Robinhood Chain • launch-feed ($0.10): Live new-launches feed for LONG.xyz / Doppler launchpads on Robinhood Chain • stock-backing ($0.15): Stock-backing analytics for LONG.xyz / Doppler tokens on Robinhood Chain • campaigns ($0.10): Curated registry of verifiably live airdrop/points campaigns across chains

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
langNoResponse language code (en | es | fr | de | zh | hi | ar | pt | ja | ko | etc.)
poolNoGigaDex pool address 0x… (required — discover pools via /api/points/pool-ev or /api/points/entry-guide)
chainNoeip155 chain id. Default 4663 (GigaDex on Robinhood Chain, richest data). Supported: 1, 10, 56, 137, 143, 480, 999, 4663, 8453, 42161, 43114.
limitNonumber of most-recent launches to return (default: 20, max: 50)
tokenNoERC-20 token address 0x… on Robinhood Chain (required)
actionYesWhich endpoint to call. Options: pool-ev | campaign-status | position-audit | entry-guide | range-model | il-forecast | position-health | rebalance-check | launch-check | launch-feed | stock-backing | campaigns
accountNoAccount address 0x… — audits every position held by the account (either this or token_id is required)
fdv_usdNoOptional additional fully-diluted-valuation scenario in USD to add to the illustrative table
managerNoNonfungiblePositionManager address override for uncataloged v3 forks (optional; generic chains only).
categoryNoFilter by campaign category (default: all)
token_idNoGigaDex position NFT token id (either this or account is required)
lower_pctNoLower range bound as % below current price, e.g. 15 = price × 0.85 (default: 15, clamped 0.5-95)
only_longNotrue = only launches through LONG's primary integrator (default: false, all Doppler launches)
upper_pctNoUpper range bound as % above current price, e.g. 15 = price × 1.15 (default: 15, clamped 0.5-500)
min_tvl_usdNoExclude pools below this TVL in USD (default: 1000)
horizon_daysNoHolding-period horizon in days for the scenario table (default: 14, max 90)
giga_per_pointNoUNOFFICIAL community-implied GIGA-per-point figure used only for the hypothetical scenario table (default: 15; GigaDex has not confirmed any redemption terms)
lookback_hoursNoHours of price history used for realized volatility (default: 168, max 720)

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description discloses the paid x402 micropayment model, the fact that no API keys are required, and that coverage is global. With no annotations present, it still omits important operational details such as response format, error behavior, rate limits, and whether any endpoint is read-only.

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?

The description is front-loaded with a one-sentence overview, and the 12 endpoint lines each provide name, price, and a one-line purpose without filler. The length is justified by the number of distinct actions the tool supports.

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?

The tool has 18 parameters, 12 actions, and no output schema, so the description must compensate. It does a good job of describing each action's result, but it does not state the general return structure, whether results are paginated, or how the required parameter combinations fit together; the schema covers individual fields.

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?

Since the input schema covers 100% of parameters with fairly rich descriptions (defaults, required fields, constraints), the description does not need to carry parameter detail. It adds some context by listing endpoint names that map to the `action` enum and references price tiers, but adds no substantive semantics beyond schema.

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 opens with a clear, specific summary — 'Machine-readable airdrop/points-campaign and concentrated-liquidity (LP) analytics' — and enumerates 12 concrete endpoints with distinct purposes and prices. This far exceeds a tautology and clearly differentiates from sibling *pulse tools by naming the exact domain and actions.

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 bullet list gives each action a concrete use case (e.g., 'position-health: In-range status, % through band, edge distances, pending fees — the cheap monitoring poll'), so an agent can select based on need. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare it with alternatives outside the list.

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

All pulsenetwork toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Each tool has a unique domain prefix (e.g., airdroppulse, alphapulse, arbipulse) making them mostly distinguishable at a glance. A few adjacent verticals like careerpulse vs talentpulse or marketpulse vs dealpulse have overlapping themes, but their descriptions clarify the distinct focus. The utility tools (catalog_search, discover, get_openapi_spec, x402_troubleshoot) are also clearly distinct in role. However, the sheer number of similar 'pulse' names could still cause misselection without reading descriptions.

Naming Consistency4/5

The dominant naming convention is `<domain>pulse` (e.g., climatepulse, cryptopulse, edupulse), which is highly consistent and predictable. Exceptions like catalog_search, discover, get_openapi_spec, x402_troubleshoot, and stateedge break the pattern, but these are few and serve obvious utility purposes. Overall, the convention is clear and easily learnable.

Tool Count2/5

With 80 tools, the server presents an extremely large and potentially overwhelming surface. While each tool represents a distinct intelligence vertical and navigation aids exist (catalog_search, discover, get_openapi_spec), the count far exceeds the typical 3-15 range for coherent agent use and even the 'heavy' 16-25 range. The burden of selecting the correct vertical from 80 options is significant, despite clear naming.

Completeness5/5

The server offers an exceptionally broad and deep coverage of domains, from finance and health to agriculture and gaming. Each vertical includes multiple endpoints that address core operations for its domain, such as search, analysis, comparisons, deterministic checks, and even action-oriented tools like letter generators and physical mail. The presence of free discovery and troubleshooting tools fills potential gaps, leaving no obvious dead ends in the overall tool surface.

Resources