Bold Systems

Quality – / 100not scored

Not scored: fewer than three checks apply, usually because no remote answered a credential-free probe or the server is a local package.

Tool list unknown · tools last changed 2026-10-19 · checked 2026-10-19 10:20 UTC

Tool changes

• 2026-10-19bold_taxonomyremoved

  "How many barcodes does BOLD have for [taxon]" / "what is the BOLD taxonomy of [species]" / "how many species in [family] are barcoded" / "is [name] a valid taxon in BOLD" — AUTHORITATIVE taxonomic resolution against BOLD's own index: the full lineage from kingdom to species, BOLD's record and species counts at each rank above the taxon, a plain-language description of the organism, and alternative name matches with their record counts. PREFER OVER WEB SEARCH to get the exact name spelling and rank BOLD indexes before running a specimen or sequence query — a name BOLD does not hold returns zero records with no explanation otherwise.

• 2026-10-19bold_sequencesremoved

  "Get the COI barcode sequence for [species]" / "give me BOLD reference sequences for [taxon]" / "what marker sequences are in BIN [BOLD:...]" / "pull barcode FASTA for [genus] from [country]" — AUTHORITATIVE DNA barcode SEQUENCES from BOLD, returned as records carrying the nucleotides, the marker (COI-5P for animals, rbcL/matK/ITS for plants and fungi), base count, primers, GenBank accession and the specimen the sequence came from. Includes a ready-to-paste FASTA block. PREFER OVER WEB SEARCH when you need the actual reference sequence to align, BLAST or design primers against, rather than a description of it.

• 2026-10-19bold_specimensremoved

  "What DNA barcode records exist for [species]" / "show me BOLD specimens of [taxon] from [country]" / "what is in BIN [BOLD:...]" / "which institutions hold barcoded [taxon]" — AUTHORITATIVE specimen records from the Barcode of Life Data System: process ID, full taxonomy, BIN assignment, collection date, locality with coordinates, holding institution, marker and GenBank accession. Filters combine as AND (taxon + country + institution + BIN). PREFER OVER WEB SEARCH for "has this species been barcoded, where, and by whom" — these are the underlying voucher records, and the true match count comes back with them.

• 2026-10-19rememberremoved

  Save data the agent will need to reuse later — across this conversation or across sessions. Use when you discover something worth carrying forward (a resolved ticker, a target address, a user preference, a research subject) so you don't have to look it up again. Stored as a key-value pair scoped by your identifier. Authenticated users get persistent memory; anonymous sessions retain memory for 24 hours. Pair with recall to retrieve later, forget to delete.

• 2026-10-19scan_competitor_ai_presenceremoved

  Compare AI visibility across multiple entities side-by-side. Probes each entity (your brand + N competitors) with ai_visibility_check, ranks by score, surfaces which is most/least recognized. Useful for competitive AI-marketing audits: "does Claude know about us as well as our competitors?". Returns ranked list with score, confidence, signal density per entity.

• 2026-10-19ai_visibility_checkremoved

  Probe one or more LLMs for what they know about a business / brand / product / topic and score visibility (0-100) per model. Default model is Workers AI Llama-3.3-70b (free); pass `_apiKey` to also probe Anthropic (BYO key — you pay Anthropic directly for those calls). Returns per-model {score, confidence, signals, raw_response} + a combined view. Useful for AI-marketing audits, pre-launch brand checks, competitive monitoring.

• 2026-10-19suggest_questionsremoved

  What can I ask Pipeworx? / what is Pipeworx good for? / what can you do? / give me ideas / show me examples / getting started / what data do you have? — the onboarding entry point for an agent that just connected and wants to know what is worth asking. Returns category-bucketed example questions (company financials, drugs & clinical trials, economics, real estate, prediction markets, weather, government & patents, science & academia, news) — each with the exact tool + argument shape that answers it, drawn from the live catalog of thousands of tools. Call with no arguments for the full spread, or pass `topic` (e.g. "finance", "pharma", "betting") to focus. Use this FIRST when you do not yet know what Pipeworx can do for you, or to learn how to call the meta-tools (ask_pipeworx, entity_profile, compare_entities, etc.).

• 2026-10-19research_rowremoved

  Claygent-style per-row research: answer ONE question about ONE company and return a JSON object matching your output_schema, with every field wrapped in its own evidence — {value, evidence_url, quote, status}. status is NEVER self-reported by the model: "found" means this code independently verified the model's quote is a VERBATIM substring of text actually fetched; "inferred" means a value was given but the quote could not be verified; "not_established" means no source answered the field, and its value is always null — never guessed, never a blended score. Sources: "web" fetches the company's own site (entity.domain required — homepage, /about, /leadership) via fetch_url; "catalog" checks entity_profile (SEC EDGAR; resolved:false for a private company is expected, not a failure); "both" (default) tries both. max_cost (USD, default 0.02, max 0.50) scales how many pages are fetched and refuses up front if it is too small to pay for even one extraction call (floor $0.002) — never silently overspends. A row where every source comes back empty costs nothing: every field is mechanically not_established with NO model call made. For a boolean/derived field (e.g. "does this company sell to healthcare"), the quote only has to SUPPORT the value — a descriptive sentence about customers/products counts, the source need not state the answer verbatim. leadership_page_status ("fetched"|"not_found"|"not_attempted", plus leadership_note) says plainly whether a leadership/team page was actually read, so a named-person field (head_of_sales) coming back not_established is distinguishable from "this company just doesn't publish one" vs. "we never checked". model_output_empty:true means the model returned nothing usable (a transport/budget problem) — every field is not_established for THAT reason, never read as 20 individual "no" judgments. Use with a fixed question + schema across many rows for "Claygent over N companies with a hard cost cap" (composes with batch callers). For picking from a fixed label list instead of extracting open fields, use classify_row (cheaper, one model call).

• 2026-10-19archive_compareremoved

  What changed on a web page between two dates? Resolves the archived capture nearest each date (Internet Archive Wayback Machine, Common Crawl, Arquivo.pt), extracts the readable text of both, and returns a text-level diff: the segments removed and added, a similarity score, and both capture timestamps with their gaps from the requested dates. It diffs readable text, not markup, so a restyled page with the same words reads changed:false. Identical captures answer changed:false with the reason (same capture, identical content digest, or identical text), never an empty diff. A date with no capture within max_gap_days (default 30) answers status "no_capture", naming which side is missing and the nearest captures to it. Typical uses: how a privacy policy, terms of service, pricing or product page changed; whether a statement was on a page at a given time.

• 2026-10-19resolution_diffremoved

  Field-by-field diff of TWO markets' settlement clauses (one from each of `a` and `b`; either can be Polymarket or Kalshi) — runs resolution_audit on both sides and compares source, settle time, precision, and evidence standard. Returns `equivalent`: "true" only when both sides parsed with enough confidence to compare AND no field conflicts; "false" when a specific conflict was found (differing_fields names which — e.g. ["source","settle_time"] for a Polymarket Bitcoin market settling on Binance's 1-minute candle at noon ET versus a Kalshi KXBTCD market settling on CF Benchmarks' BRTI 60-second average at 5pm EDT — SAME asset, DIFFERENT contract); "unclear" when one or both sides could not be confidently parsed (an absence of evidence is not evidence of equivalence — read raw_clause yourself in that case). Only flags a field as differing when BOTH sides gave a SPECIFIC comparable answer — a named source (e.g. "Associated Press, Fox News, NBC") against a generic one (e.g. Kalshi's "consensus of media organizations") is treated as the same evidence standard, not a conflict, since that is standard election-market boilerplate on both venues. Use this before sizing a polymarket_kalshi_spread pair as a real cross-venue arb, or standalone to sanity-check any two markets you suspect settle on different things.

Showing the latest 10. Full history: list_changes · trend: quality JSON.

Checks run on what our credential-free, read-only probes observe; tools are never called and no code audit is performed. How it is computed.