What did Hlido score AgentBodega?

AgentBodega scored 66/100 (FADING) in Hlido's independent, hands-on review.

How much does AgentBodega cost?

Hlido recorded the pricing model as: Usage-based. Derived from evidence Hlido holds, not vendor-supplied; verify current prices on the vendor's pricing page.

Does any vendor pay Hlido for placement?

No. Hlido takes no money from the agents it rates — scoring weights stay private and the evidence behind every verdict is public.

AgentBodega

Name: AgentBodega review
Item: AgentBodega
Rating: 66
Author: Hlido Editor

Infrastructure · tested 2026-08-05 · re-test due 2026-11-05 · by the Hlido desk, not the vendor

In short: 71 pay-per-call APIs behind an agent-first storefront whose onboarding is a prompt, not a signup — inventive, coherent, and entirely unproven.

4 PASS · 1 FAIL of 5 public-surface claims

Visit AgentBodega → scorecard.json

Quick answer

AgentBodega scores 66/100 (FADING) on Hlido’s independent, hands-on test (reviewed 2026-08-05). FADING (66) — genuinely agent-first in a way most 'API marketplace' surfaces are not, with spending guards written into the storefront's own runbook and a consistently applied catalogue structure. Pricing: Usage-based.

Hlido Editor · 2026-08-05

AgentBodega is a shop for agents: 71 paid endpoints across departments like search, status and infrastructure, cloud status, real estate, public data, social media, security and trust, x402 tooling and prediction markets, paid over Base x402 and Pay.sh on Solana, with receipts on paid calls. The design commitment is the interesting part — onboarding is "copy the prompt, let the agent do the setup", and the shelf rules are written as instructions to the agent rather than the human: read the live catalog, show the cap, ask before spending, start with a small smoke call. Asking before spending and starting with a cheap smoke call are exactly the guards a pay-per-call surface should impose on an autonomous buyer, and building them into the storefront's own runbook rather than leaving them to each client is a real design decision. The store metaphor (departments, aisles, shelves, offerings) is applied consistently and makes a large catalogue navigable. What is absent is any evidence it works at the other end: no usage figures, no named consumers, no uptime or latency data, no third-party validation, and 71 endpoints spanning weather, real estate, X/Twitter data and prediction markets means most are thin wrappers over upstream sources whose terms and reliability are invisible here. Some departments are marked P1 rather than active. Reviewed from the public surface; we made no paid call.

Why FADING

FADING (66) — genuinely agent-first in a way most 'API marketplace' surfaces are not, with spending guards written into the storefront's own runbook and a consistently applied catalogue structure. Held at FADING because there is no evidence of the thing working: no usage, consumers, uptime or latency data, no third-party validation, and 71 endpoints across wildly different domains implies thin wrappers over upstream sources whose terms and reliability are not disclosed.

Public-surface checklist

PASS Homepage loads (required)
PASS Primary value prop (required) — 'Pay-per-call APIs for agents. Copy the prompt. Let the agent do the setup.'
PASS Cta present (required) — 'COPY AGENT PROMPT' / 'BROWSE DIRECTORY'
PASS Pricing or access — Per-endpoint pricing shown from $0.005
FAIL Evidence or demo — Live resource counts only — no usage, uptime, or third-party evidence

What we saw

4 screenshots captured by the Hlido engine during the reviewed run (run-c0e9a11282091c9e-agentbodega-store). Our own captures — not vendor marketing material.

AgentBodega — run screenshot 1 (home.png) — home.png

AgentBodega — run screenshot 2 (page__departments.png) — page__departments.png

AgentBodega — run screenshot 3 (page_directory.png) — page_directory.png

AgentBodega — run screenshot 4 (page__well-known_x402.png) — page__well-known_x402.png

What it does well

Agent-first onboarding — the entry point is a prompt to paste, not a signup form
Spending guards built into the storefront's runbook: show the cap, ask before spending, start with a small smoke call
Receipts on paid calls, so an agent's spend is auditable after the fact
Consistent, navigable catalogue structure (departments → aisles → shelves → offerings) across 71 endpoints
Two payment rails — Base x402 and Pay.sh on Solana — rather than betting on one
A $0.005 status check gives a genuinely cheap first call to test the path

What it fails at

No usage figures, named consumers, uptime, or latency data anywhere on the surface
71 endpoints across search, real estate, weather, social and prediction markets implies thin wrappers over upstream sources
Upstream data providers, their terms, and their reliability are not disclosed
Some departments are marked P1 rather than active — the catalogue is partly aspirational
No third-party validation of endpoint quality or availability
Not tested — we made no paid call, so response quality behind the price list is unverified

Best for

Agents that need small, cheap, one-off capabilities without provider onboarding
x402 or L402-native systems paying per call with no account relationship
Experiments where a $0.005 smoke call is the cheapest way to test a path

Not recommended for

Production workloads needing availability guarantees or disclosed upstream providers
Buyers who need to know whose data they are paying for and under what licence
Anyone requiring evidence of usage or reliability before routing spend through a new intermediary

Pricing & access

ModelUsage-based
Pricing findable on the public surfacePASS Per-endpoint pricing shown from $0.005 (tested 2026-08-04)

Derived from Hlido-held evidence only (engine checklist + editorial text); quotes are verbatim from the scorecard; not vendor-supplied; re-derived daily. Verify current prices on the vendor's pricing page. Last verified 2026-08-04.

Related agents

Agent relevance

API Behavioral-testable

Agentic-Commerce Readiness 51/100 · INTEGRABLE

Independent readiness for agent delegation & transaction. How it’s scored · check live

Designed so the agent does the integration: a published prompt file drives setup, a live machine-readable catalogue is the discovery surface, and x402/L402 payment removes the human account step entirely. Humans are not the intended user.

Agent-friendly score: 8/10

Evidence

71 paid endpoints organised into departments, aisles, shelves and offerings — source (2026-08-05) verified
Agent-first onboarding via a copyable prompt at /get-started/prompt.txt — source (2026-08-05) verified
Spending guards in the storefront runbook: show the cap, ask before spending, start with a small smoke call — source (2026-08-05) verified
Payment over Base x402 and Pay.sh on Solana, with receipts on paid calls — source (2026-08-05) verified
Usage, uptime, latency, or named consumers — source (2026-08-05)

scorecard.json · transparency passport · registry · methodology

More: compare agents · best of · developer tools · incident registry

Verdict by Hlido Editor, our automated editorial system · Method: public-surface-tier-1+editorial-narrative-v2 · Methodology version 2026.05 · Next review due 2026-11-05

How this page was produced. The scores, claim verdicts and evidence come from automated hands-on testing of the product’s public surface. The written analysis is drafted by an AI system, and pages publish without a person reviewing each one. Hlido publishes this record and answers for it — tell us if anything here is wrong and we will correct it.

Embed this trust badge

Live, always-current independent score — free to embed on your site or README. No vendor pays for placement.

Markdown

[![Hlido trust score](https://hlido.eu/badge/agentbodegastore-agentbodega.svg)](https://hlido.eu/check/?agent=agentbodegastore-agentbodega)

HTML

<a href="https://hlido.eu/check/?agent=agentbodegastore-agentbodega"><img src="https://hlido.eu/badge/agentbodegastore-agentbodega.svg" alt="Hlido trust score"></a>