LARP check · Robinhood Chain
$AGEM
$AGEM
Robinhood Chain4 claims read from its site. We could not find a contract, a working app or recent code of its own that backs it.
Read 12 h ago · mcap at check $176.4k · now $216.9k · since check +23.0%
What it says, and what we found
- not found“Pick a plan, set a daily target and Agent M trades your token s pool for you.” its sitewe could not find a contract, a working app or recent code of its own that backs this
- not read“Pay once in ETH. 10% is our fee; the rest is your trading budget.” its sitechainnot read on the chain: not in our read of the chain
- not found“Starter 0.2 ETH ≈ $ 500 trading budget 0.18 ETH” its sitewe could not find a contract, a working app or recent code of its own that backs this
- not found“Withdraw any time.” its sitewe could not find a contract, a working app or recent code of its own that backs this
The claims are their own words, quoted by Claude Haiku 5.5; Claude Sonnet 5.5 checked each result against our evidence; every check of them is our own read, and chain facts come from the chain.
Working parts we tested
- no answerAPI: no address of its API we tried answered with data (agentm.fun/api/health, agentm.fun/api/stats, agentm.fun/api/status)
- no answerMCP: no MCP server answered at agentm.fun/mcp, agentm.fun/api/mcp
- factX account @agentmfun: exists (an account is not working tech; it backs no claim)
- readThe page we read: agentm.fun/ (listed on DexScreener)
Holders of 1M $TOLL can re-read this now. Get $TOLL
Claude Sonnet 5.5 reviewed this read · holders see its notes. Get $TOLL
How we read it
We read what the project says in its own words: its website, its code README and its launch post. Each thing it says it offers is listed as a claim. Then we test it ourselves, and only our own reads count: the contracts it names on chain, who calls them and what they actually do; its app; its own API answering with data; its MCP server listing its tools; its x402 payments; its Chrome Web Store listing; its Telegram bot; its public code changed in the last 30 days. An X account that exists is shown as a fact; it never backs a claim.
- product found a contract of theirs is used by wallets other than the team, or two different working parts of theirs answered our reads.
- product partly found one working part of theirs answered, or weaker support (a contract only the team calls, a page of theirs that opens, fresh code).
- product not found we read their words, and nothing we could check backs them.
- product not read we could not read their words (no site or post, a site that did not open, or one that draws itself with scripts).
Facts, not a verdict: a quiet contract can be tech that launched yesterday, and a busy one can still lose you money. Not advice.