Skip to main content
Glama

pulsenetwork

by com.theaslangroupllc.pulse

marketpulse

MarketPulse: The AI-visibility layer for businesses anywhere in the world — get found by the assistants doing the choosing. Live AI-visibility check with verbatim site evidence ($0.50: per-crawler robots.txt rules, llms.txt, Schema.org, NAP), LLM visibility strategy, country-aware local SEO, channel mix, content briefs, ad copy, competitor gap, ROI forecasting. 12 endpoints, global platforms incl. WeChat/Douyin/LINE/Naver.

Coverage: Global

Endpoints: • llm-visibility ($0.15): LLM visibility analysis • content-brief ($0.15): Dual-optimized content brief • channel-mix ($0.10): Marketing channel mix strategy • roi-forecast ($0.08): Marketing ROI forecast • competitor-gap ($0.10): Competitor gap analysis • ad-copy ($0.08): Ready-to-use ad copy variants • email-sequence ($0.15): Email nurture sequence • social-strategy ($0.08): Platform social media strategy • local-seo ($0.08): Local SEO optimization guide • seo-audit ($0.10): Technical SEO review • seo-review ($0.10): Technical SEO review • ai-visibility-check ($0.50): Live AI-visibility check (GEO/AEO) w/ verbatim site evidence • video-ad-script ($0.10): Shot-by-shot video ad script • voiceover-script ($0.08): TTS-ready voiceover script • ai-visibility-probe ($0.25): AI-visibility probe (GEO/AEO) — $0.25 agent-tier preview

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
goalNoWhat the content should accomplish
langNoLanguage to respond in — defaults to English
toneNoVoice tone direction in plain language
brandNoThe brand to assess AI-answer visibility for — provide brand and/or topic
goalsNoPrimary marketing goal to optimize the mix around
stageNoBusiness stage — startup, growth, or scale
topicNoThe topic or category to assess AI visibility within — provide brand and/or topic
actionYesWhich endpoint to call. Options: llm-visibility | content-brief | channel-mix | roi-forecast | competitor-gap | ad-copy | email-sequence | social-strategy | local-seo | seo-audit | seo-review | ai-visibility-check | video-ad-script | voiceover-script | ai-visibility-probe
budgetNoMonthly marketing budget, with currency and period
domainNothe website to check — bare domain, any country
formatNoVoiceover format: video_ad, explainer, podcast_ad, youtube_intro or ivr_greeting — defaults to video_ad
productNoThe product or service being advertised
websiteNoThe website domain to review
audienceNoWho this content is written for — sharpens tone and structure
businessNoThe type of business to build a local SEO plan for
channelsNoComma-separated channels to forecast — defaults to a general digital-marketing mix
durationNoTarget video length in seconds — defaults to 30
industryNoThe industry to benchmark ROI projections against
locationNoCity and state/region the business serves — sharpens citation and competitor guidance
platformNoAd platform to write copy for
competitorNoThe competitor brand or company to analyze
business_typeNoThe business or offer to plan a channel mix for
sequence_typeNoType of sequence to write — welcome, nurture, abandoned_cart, post_purchase, or re_engagement

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / action / description
      Previous value: -"Which endpoint to call. Options: llm-visibility | content-brief | channel-mix | roi-forecast | competitor-gap | ad-copy | email-sequence | social-strategy | local-seo | seo-audit | seo-review | ai-visibility-check | video-ad-script | voiceover-script"New value: +"Which endpoint to call. Options: llm-visibility | content-brief | channel-mix | roi-forecast | competitor-gap | ad-copy | email-sequence | social-strategy | local-seo | seo-audit | seo-review | ai-visibility-check | video-ad-script | voiceover-script | ai-visibility-probe"
    • changedInput schema / properties / action / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "llm-visibility",
-  "content-brief",
-  "channel-mix",
-  "roi-forecast",
-  "competitor-gap",
-  "ad-copy",
-  "email-sequence",
-  "social-strategy",
-  "local-seo",
-  "seo-audit",
-  "seo-review",
-  "ai-visibility-check",
-  "video-ad-script",
-  "voiceover-script"
-]New value: +[
+  "llm-visibility",
+  "content-brief",
+  "channel-mix",
+  "roi-forecast",
+  "competitor-gap",
+  "ad-copy",
+  "email-sequence",
+  "social-strategy",
+  "local-seo",
+  "seo-audit",
+  "seo-review",
+  "ai-visibility-check",
+  "video-ad-script",
+  "voiceover-script",
+  "ai-visibility-probe"
+]
  2. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / action / description
      Previous value: -"Which endpoint to call. Options: llm-visibility | content-brief | channel-mix | roi-forecast | competitor-gap | ad-copy | email-sequence | social-strategy | local-seo | seo-audit | seo-review | ai-visibility-check"New value: +"Which endpoint to call. Options: llm-visibility | content-brief | channel-mix | roi-forecast | competitor-gap | ad-copy | email-sequence | social-strategy | local-seo | seo-audit | seo-review | ai-visibility-check | video-ad-script | voiceover-script"
    • changedInput schema / properties / action / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "llm-visibility",
-  "content-brief",
-  "channel-mix",
-  "roi-forecast",
-  "competitor-gap",
-  "ad-copy",
-  "email-sequence",
-  "social-strategy",
-  "local-seo",
-  "seo-audit",
-  "seo-review",
-  "ai-visibility-check"
-]New value: +[
+  "llm-visibility",
+  "content-brief",
+  "channel-mix",
+  "roi-forecast",
+  "competitor-gap",
+  "ad-copy",
+  "email-sequence",
+  "social-strategy",
+  "local-seo",
+  "seo-audit",
+  "seo-review",
+  "ai-visibility-check",
+  "video-ad-script",
+  "voiceover-script"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / duration
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Target video length in seconds — defaults to 30",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / format
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Voiceover format: video_ad, explainer, podcast_ad, youtube_intro or ivr_greeting — defaults to video_ad",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / tone
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Voice tone direction in plain language",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / action / description
      Previous value: -"Which endpoint to call. Options: llm-visibility | content-brief | channel-mix | roi-forecast | competitor-gap | ad-copy | email-sequence | social-strategy | local-seo | seo-audit | seo-review"New value: +"Which endpoint to call. Options: llm-visibility | content-brief | channel-mix | roi-forecast | competitor-gap | ad-copy | email-sequence | social-strategy | local-seo | seo-audit | seo-review | ai-visibility-check"
    • changedInput schema / properties / action / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "llm-visibility",
-  "content-brief",
-  "channel-mix",
-  "roi-forecast",
-  "competitor-gap",
-  "ad-copy",
-  "email-sequence",
-  "social-strategy",
-  "local-seo",
-  "seo-audit",
-  "seo-review"
-]New value: +[
+  "llm-visibility",
+  "content-brief",
+  "channel-mix",
+  "roi-forecast",
+  "competitor-gap",
+  "ad-copy",
+  "email-sequence",
+  "social-strategy",
+  "local-seo",
+  "seo-audit",
+  "seo-review",
+  "ai-visibility-check"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / domain
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "the website to check — bare domain, any country",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  4. First observed

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only provides marketing language, pricing, and a list of endpoints. It does not mention side effects, rate limits, authentication, data handling, or what the actual response looks like. The description mentions per-endpoint pricing and 'verbatim site evidence' for one action, but overall the operational behavior remains opaque.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is verbose and front-loaded with marketing hype ('get found by the assistants doing the choosing') rather than essential operational information. It claims '12 endpoints' but lists 15, and contains redundancy (seo-audit and seo-review both described as 'Technical SEO review'). The bullet list is useful but could be trimmed significantly; it does not earn its length.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (23 parameters, 15 actions, no output schema), the description is incomplete for correct invocation. It does not explain which parameters are required for each action, how to combine them, or what the output format will be. Similar endpoints (e.g., ai-visibility-check vs ai-visibility-probe, seo-audit vs seo-review) are not sufficiently disambiguated, leaving the agent to guess.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by attaching prices and short functional explanations to each action enum value (e.g., 'ai-visibility-check ($0.50): Live AI-visibility check (GEO/AEO) w/ verbatim site evidence'). This helps an agent understand the semantics of the 'action' parameter, which is otherwise just a list of names.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description identifies the tool as 'the AI-visibility layer for businesses' and lists many capabilities (LLM visibility, local SEO, ad copy, ROI forecasting), which gives a broad sense of purpose. However, it is a multi-endpoint dispatcher with 15 actions, and the description does not clearly state a single specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling 'pulse' tools by focusing on AI-visibility/marketing, but the scope is too sprawling for a clear purpose.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are there any exclusions or prerequisites. The description is essentially a menu of endpoints and prices, but does not explain how to choose an action or which parameters are needed for each. This leaves the agent to infer usage entirely from the schema.

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