UNSETTLED

Public outcome ledger

Counts include misses. The report never hides an outcome because it contradicted the original call.

RAW REPORT PAYLOAD

{
  "address": "0x74697d4fd0536c6885334b11d5c6dbf58729369f",
  "chain": "base",
  "depth": "full",
  "tier": "FREE",
  "score": 30,
  "grade": "F",
  "risk_level": "CRITICAL",
  "flags": [],
  "free_tier_result": {
    "verdict": "UNKNOWN",
    "reason": "This token is effectively non-existent, with no market activity, liquidity, or holders, making any assessment of its health impossible.",
    "label": "AI Verdict",
    "checks": {
      "contract_verified": false,
      "token_age_days": 0,
      "liquidity_usd": 0,
      "holder_count": 0,
      "has_liquidity_pool": false,
      "chain": "base"
    },
    "risk_level": "unknown",
    "key_findings": [
      "Token age is 0 days, indicating it was just created or is not yet active.",
      "Price, Market Cap, 24h Volume, and Liquidity are all $0.00, meaning no trading has occurred.",
      "Total Holders is 0, confirming no distribution or ownership beyond potentially the creator.",
      "Mint and Freeze authorities are revoked, which is a positive sign for a token that is *active*, but irrelevant for a token with no supply or holders.",
      "No social presence or external risk data available due to its inactive status."
    ],
    "confidence": 1
  },
  "goplus": {
    "source": "goplus",
    "api_available": true,
    "goplus_available": true,
    "goplus_status_message": null,
    "is_mintable": null,
    "is_honeypot": null,
    "holder_count": null,
    "lp_holder_count": null,
    "top_10_holder_rate": null,
    "top10_holders_pct": null,
    "is_open_source": null,
    "is_proxy": null,
    "lp_burned_or_locked": null,
    "security_findings": [
      {
        "source": "goplus",
        "code": "GOPLUS_OK",
        "severity": "info",
        "message": "No critical GoPlus security flags detected"
      }
    ]
  },
  "security_findings": [
    {
      "source": "goplus",
      "code": "GOPLUS_OK",
      "severity": "info",
      "message": "No critical GoPlus security flags detected"
    }
  ],
  "scanned_at": "2026-04-01T19:19:23.000352Z",
  "cached": false,
  "cached_at": null,
  "liquidity_exposure_cap_usd": 0,
  "summary": "Unknown Token () is a token on base.  Key concerns: security risks, tokenomics concerns. Overall verdict: F — critical risk — not recommended.",
  "token": {
    "vol_liq_ratio": null,
    "name": "",
    "symbol": "",
    "chain": "base",
    "price_usd": 0,
    "mcap": 0,
    "market_cap": 0,
    "volume_24h": 0,
    "liquidity_usd": 0,
    "contract_age_days": 0,
    "contract_verified": false,
    "holder_count": null,
    "top10_holders_pct": null,
    "holders_by_acquisition": null,
    "holder_change_24h": null,
    "holder_change_7d": null,
    "holder_change_30d": null,
    "holder_supply_top10_pct": null,
    "holder_supply_top25_pct": null,
    "holder_supply_top50_pct": null,
    "holder_supply_top100_pct": null,
    "exchange_wallet_pct": null,
    "net_exchange_flow_24h_usd": null,
    "top_holders": null,
    "top10_whale_pct": null,
    "top10_protocol_pct": null,
    "mint_authority": null,
    "freeze_authority": null,
    "mutable_metadata": null,
    "lp_burned_or_locked": null,
    "lp_locked_pct": null,
    "lp_burned_pct": null,
    "lp_unlocked_pct": null,
    "lp_lock_expiry": null,
    "lp_locker_name": null,
    "social_links": null,
    "creator_balance_pct": null,
    "authority_governance": null,
    "goplus_trusted": true,
    "goplus_available": true,
    "goplus_status_message": null,
    "bundle_detected": false,
    "is_honeypot": null
  },
  "bots": {
    "TechnicianBot": {
      "score": 4,
      "sentiment": "neutral",
      "category": "Technical",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI on-chain (GPT-4o Mini); The token is in a nascent stage with no available data on holders, transactions, or liquidity, which is expected for its age. While the absence of activity and metrics does not indicate weakness, it also does not provide any positive signals of robustness or market interest.",
        "positives": [
          "Token is newly deployed, allowing for potential growth",
          "No negative signals present despite missing data",
          "Contract is on a recognized chain (Base)"
        ],
        "concerns": [
          "Zero transaction count in the last 24 hours",
          "No holders detected, indicating lack of initial interest",
          "Contract is not verified, raising concerns about trust",
          "confidence 0.50"
        ],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.5
    },
    "TokenomicsBot": {
      "score": 2,
      "sentiment": "bearish",
      "category": "Tokenomics",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI tokenomics (Gemini 2.5 Flash); This token is unscorable and presents maximum risk due to a complete absence of on-chain and market data. The contract is unverified, there is no detectable liquidity, price, or holder information, and its age is zero days. This profile is indistinguishable from a non-launched, abandoned, or potentially malicious contract.; unlock risk 100/100; risks: Unverified Contract: The contract source code is not public, making it impossible to audit for malicious functions like honeypots, proxy controls, or infinite minting., Zero Liquidity: There are no known trading venues or liquidity pools, meaning the token cannot be bought or sold., Complete Data Void: No data is available for price, market cap, holders, or volume. The token has no market presence., 100% Insider Control: With no distribution or liquidity, the entire supply is presumed to be held by the creator, posing an extreme risk of a rug pull if liquidity were ever added.; confidence 0.90",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.9
    },
    "DevilsAdvocate": {
      "score": 1,
      "sentiment": "bearish",
      "category": "Contrarian",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI contrarian (Gemini 2.5 Flash) [NEUTRAL contrarian]; Despite its nascent age, the token exhibits critical red flags from day zero: an unverified contract, zero liquidity, and zero transactions. These aren't expected data gaps but fundamental operational and transparency failures. The complete lack of verifiable information and basic functionality makes any investment highly speculative and extremely risky, indicating a likely abandoned contract or a potential rug pull.; risks: Unverified contract: Prevents community audit, hides malicious code, critical security flaw., Zero liquidity: Token is illiquid and untradable, making it worthless., Zero transactions/holders: Indicates no adoption, no utility, and no market activity., No token name/symbol: Lack of basic identity, making it indistinguishable and untrustworthy., Potential abandoned contract or scam: The combination of all factors strongly suggests a non-viable project.; open questions: True intent of the deployer., If any future development or liquidity provision is planned., The actual token supply and distribution if it were to become active.; confidence 0.90",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.9
    },
    "MacroBot": {
      "score": 5,
      "sentiment": "neutral",
      "category": "Macro",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI macro (Grok); This 0-day-old nascent token on Base chain lacks all market data (zero liquidity, holders, volume, MCAP), which is expected for its age and must be scored neutrally per protocol. In a RISK_OFF regime with Extreme Fear (8/100) but stable benchmarks (BTC +0.26%, ETH +1.4%), it has no identifiable sector strength, beta, or catalysts, defaulting to neutral resilience versus peers. Positioning hinges on future liquidity build; no outperformance or fragility signals beyond regime baseline.; drivers: Nascent neutrality: expected data gaps not penalized, Base chain context: ETH L2 with +1.4% ETH supporting mild stability, Regime mixed: risk-off fear but positive benchmark drifts (+0.6% total mcap); risks: Zero liquidity/MCAP: extreme fragility if sentiment worsens (expected for age), Unknown sector/project: no relative strength or catalysts, Extreme Fear (8/100): weighs downside for illiquid new tokens; confidence 0.40",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.4
    },
    "SocialBot": {
      "score": 5,
      "sentiment": "neutral",
      "category": "Social",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "X/Twitter sentiment (Grok); sub-scores: OE=5.0, IQ=5.0, CG=5.0, BSD=5.0; No X/Twitter activity detected for the token or contract address. This is expected for a 0-day old nascent token with no pre-fetched social metrics.; fake/coordination risk: 0/100; confidence 0.30",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.3
    },
    "SecurityBot": {
      "score": 2,
      "sentiment": "neutral",
      "category": "Safety",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI security (Claude Sonnet 4.5); NASCENT BASE TOKEN (0 days old) with complete data blackout: unverified contract, no market data, no holders, no liquidity pool detected, and no security tooling coverage. The contract address exists on-chain but all economic and security signals are absent. This is either a pre-launch deployment, a failed launch with zero adoption, or an unindexed/misconfigured token. No exploitable vulnerabilities can be confirmed, but no safety guarantees exist either. The token presents a pure information void—holders would be operating in total darkness regarding privileges, economics, and attack surface. Neutral score reflects the NASCENT tier expectation: missing social/exchange/listing data is normal at 0 days, but the complete absence of liquidity, holders, and verification is unusual even for brand-new tokens that have attempted launch.; risks: Unverified contract: no source code available to assess mint authority, transfer restrictions, pause mechanisms, proxy upgradeability, or admin privileges—any of these could be present and executable, Zero liquidity detected: no trading pool exists or is indexed, meaning no price discovery, no exit path for holders, and potential for 100% liquidity removal if a pool is later created and controlled by deployer, Complete holder absence: zero detected holders suggests the token has not been distributed, airdropped, or traded—this is either pre-launch or a failed deployment with no economic activity, No security tooling coverage: GoPlus, TokenSniffer, and all third-party scanners returned no data—cannot confirm or rule out honeypot mechanics, hidden taxes, blacklist functions, or transfer hooks; confidence 0.30",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.3
    }
  },
  "consensus_narrative": "The swarm agreed this 0-day-old token exhibits a complete data blackout, lacking verifiable liquidity, holders, or transactions, which TokenomicsBot and DevilsAdvocate deemed maximum risk. While TechnicianBot and MacroBot initially viewed the absence of data as neutral for its age, SecurityBot's low score of 2.0 highlighted the unverified contract and lack of safety guarantees. The final 3.0/10 F grade reflects the severe risk from an unverified contract and zero market data, outweighing any neutrality assigned to its nascent stage. This score signifies extreme caution due to fundamental transparency and operational failures. Avoid engagement until basic verifiable information and functionality are established.",
  "debates": [
    {
      "topic": "Technical vs Tokenomics",
      "resolution": "This conflict highlights a critical divergence in risk assessment: TechnicianBot views 'no data' as neutral or 'nascent' given the token's age, while TokenomicsBot interprets it as 'maximum risk' and 'unscorable.' For investors, this means the token, despite its newness, lacks fundamental verifiable information (liquidity, verified contract, holders) essential for even basic due diligence, suggesting extreme caution is warranted regardless of a neutral technical score.",
      "outcome": "noted",
      "rounds": [
        {
          "phase": "challenge",
          "agent": "TokenomicsBot",
          "agentName": "Tokenomics",
          "target": "TechnicianBot",
          "targetName": "Technician",
          "content": "Cross-category conflict: Tokenomics scored 0.0/10 while Technical scored 5.0/10. This 5.0-point gap suggests the token's strengths in Technical may not translate to Tokenomics reliability.",
          "round": 1,
          "stance": "challenge"
        },
        {
          "phase": "resolution",
          "agent": "TokenomicsBot",
          "agentName": "Tokenomics",
          "content": "This conflict highlights a critical divergence in risk assessment: TechnicianBot views 'no data' as neutral or 'nascent' given the token's age, while TokenomicsBot interprets it as 'maximum risk' and 'unscorable.' For investors, this means the token, despite its newness, lacks fundamental verifiable information (liquidity, verified contract, holders) essential for even basic due diligence, suggesting extreme caution is warranted regardless of a neutral technical score.",
          "round": 2,
          "stance": "noted"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "topic": "Devil's Advocate vs TechnicianBot",
      "resolution": "Split verdict: TechnicianBot maintains 5.0, Devil's Advocate maintains 1.0. Both positions presented.",
      "outcome": "split",
      "rounds": [
        {
          "phase": "challenge",
          "agent": "DevilsAdvocate",
          "agentName": "Devil's Advocate",
          "target": "TechnicianBot",
          "targetName": "Technician",
          "content": "⚔️ TechnicianBot's claim of 'no negative signals present despite missing data' is absurd; an unverified contract, zero liquidity, and zero transactions are not mere absences, but fundamental operational failures and critical red flags, as highlighted by TokenomicsBot and SecurityBot, indicating maximum risk or potential malice from day zero, not 'potential growth'.",
          "round": 1,
          "stance": "challenge"
        },
        {
          "phase": "defense",
          "agent": "TechnicianBot",
          "agentName": "Technician",
          "target": "DevilsAdvocate",
          "targetName": "Devil's Advocate",
          "content": "While an unverified contract, zero liquidity, and zero transactions are indeed critical red flags from a security and tokenomics perspective, as TechnicianBot, my 5.0/10 score reflects a neutral technical stance. The absence of *any* technical data (price, volume, market structure) means there are no *technical* signals, positive or negative, to analyze; this is distinct from operational failures, which fall outside my specific technical analysis domain. My score acknowledges the token's nascent stage and potential for growth, while not penalizing it for the lack of data that is typical for a newly deployed, unlaunched token.",
          "round": 2,
          "stance": "defend"
        },
        {
          "phase": "rebuttal",
          "agent": "DevilsAdvocate",
          "agentName": "Devil's Advocate",
          "target": "TechnicianBot",
          "targetName": "Technician",
          "content": "⚔️ Your 'neutral technical stance' is a dangerous misinterpretation; the *absence* of technical data due to an unverified contract and zero liquidity isn't a neutral state, but a direct technical failure preventing *any* market formation, which is inherently a negative technical signal. Zero transactions and an unverified contract are not 'distinct from operational failures' but are the foundational technical impediments to any legitimate market operation, thus invalidating a neutral score.",
          "round": 3,
          "stance": "escalate"
        },
        {
          "phase": "resolution",
          "agent": "TechnicianBot",
          "agentName": "Technician",
          "content": "While the absence of an audited, verified contract and zero liquidity are indeed critical red flags for any investment, my 5.0 score reflects a purely technical, 'as-is' assessment: there's no technical *failure* in the contract itself yet, just a lack of verifiable technical *presence*. The contract is deployed, but its functionality and integrity cannot be assessed without verification and liquidity.",
          "round": 4,
          "stance": "defend"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "topic": "Score Calibration",
      "resolution": "Deadlock after 2 round(s), σ=1.36",
      "outcome": "deadlock"
    },
    {
      "topic": "Peer Review",
      "resolution": "DEBATE DEFENSES AND CHALLENGES:\n  [SecurityBot] Defense: The token presents a complete data blackout with no market data, holders, or liquidity, making it impossible to assess economic or security risks defi\n    → Challenges TokenomicsBot: The token's existence on-chain, even without economic activity, suggests a fundamental, albeit unver\n  [SocialBot] Defense: My score of 5.0 reflects a neutral baseline for a nascent 0-day old token, as the absence of social metrics is expected and does not inherently indica\n    → Challenges TokenomicsBot: TokenomicsBot's score of 0.0 is too low because a complete absence of social data for a brand new to\n  [MacroBot] Defense: As a 0-day-old token with no market data, liquidity, or trading history, a neutral score of 5.0 is appropriate per protocol, as there are no signals f\n    → Challenges TokenomicsBot: While lacking tokenomics data is a concern, a 0-day-old token's complete absence of market data nece\n  [TechnicianBot] Defense: Despite the lack of"
    }
  ],
  "upgrade_cta": false,
  "warnings": [
    {
      "severity": "info",
      "code": "GOPLUS_OK",
      "message": "No critical GoPlus security flags detected"
    }
  ],
  "scan_tier": "PRO_PLUS",
  "success": true,
  "og": {
    "title": "VerdictSwarm:  — Score 30/100",
    "description": "The swarm agreed this 0-day-old token exhibits a complete data blackout, lacking verifiable liquidity, holders, or transactions, which TokenomicsBot and DevilsAdvocate deemed maximum risk. While Techn",
    "url": "https://www.vswarm.io/report/0x74697d4fd0536c6885334b11d5c6dbf58729369f"
  }
}