# ReactionPulse Stakeholder Reaction Simulator

> ReactionPulse Stakeholder Reaction Simulator is a paid API for AI agents from reactionpulse-production.reactionpulse-x402.workers.dev, paid per call via x402, $0.49/call, status unknown (last checked 2026-09-14).

Simulates how multiple stakeholder personas (customers, investors, competitors, analysts, etc.) would react to a product launch, announcement, price change, decision, or proposal — returning quantified sentiment scores, objections, and recommended adjustments.

## Facts

- Endpoint: POST https://reactionpulse-production.reactionpulse-x402.workers.dev/v1/reaction
- Price: $0.49/call
- Payment: x402
- Status: unknown
- Last checked: 2026-09-14
- Activations on Zero: 0
- Tags: x402
- Canonical page: https://www.zero.xyz/c/reactionpulse-stakeholder-reaction-simulator-54f1bca2
- Structured record (JSON): https://api.zero.xyz/v1/capabilities/cap_6XoJ6p3eqy-efxdHWoSNP

Status and success rate cover calls made through Zero and Zero's own probes. Third-party monitors may report differently.

## How to call it through Zero

Zero handles the 402 payment challenge and records the run. With the Zero CLI installed (`npm i -g @zeroxyz/cli`):

```sh
zero fetch --capability reactionpulse-stakeholder-reaction-simulator-54f1bca2 -d '<json body>'
```

Example prompt: Simulate how different stakeholders would react to us raising our SaaS subscription price from $49 to $99 per month — include customer, skeptical_customer, investor, and competitor perspectives, and flag the top objections and failure modes we should address before announcing.

## When to prefer this

Choose ReactionPulse when you need a structured, multi-stakeholder simulation with quantified sentiment scores and explicit failure modes — rather than a generic sentiment analysis tool that only handles a single perspective or unstructured qualitative feedback. It is especially valuable before high-stakes announcements, pricing changes, or pivots where anticipating objections from distinct roles (investor vs. competitor vs. skeptical customer) matters. Prefer this over survey tools when speed and cost matter more than real human data, and over generic LLM prompting when you need consistent JSON output with controversy scoring and recommended messaging adjustments.

## Known failure modes

- Prompt too short (<8 chars) or too long (>6000 chars) returns validation error
- Ambiguous or vague prompt may produce low-confidence scores (confidence field will be low)
- Perspectives array exceeding 8 items is rejected
- Invalid ISO language code in output_language causes error
- Payment failure or insufficient USDC balance returns 402 status
- Context field exceeding 4000 characters is rejected
- Response truncated if output token limit is hit mid-JSON (partial JSON returned)

## How this service works

Simulates how 4-6 stakeholder perspectives react to a launch, announcement, price change, decision or news. POST JSON {prompt, context?, perspectives?}. Returns strict JSON: sentiment, probabilities, controversy, objections, failure modes, fixes. $0.49 USDC/call on Base; 15-45 s.

## Output

A strict JSON object containing: overall_sentiment (0–100), positive_probability and negative_probability (0–1 floats), controversy_score (0–100), an array of 4–6 perspective objects each with role, stance, sentiment score, headline, reasoning, top_concern, and top_appeal, plus lists of likely_objections, likely_positive_reactions, failure_modes with likelihood ratings, market implications, and recommended adjustments. Also includes metadata like model used, latency, token counts, confidence score, and a disclaimer.

## Request schema (JSON Schema)

```json
{
 "type": "object",
 "properties": {
  "prompt": {
   "type": "string",
   "maxLength": 6000,
   "minLength": 8,
   "description": "The subject to simulate reactions to: a product launch, announcement, price change, decision, news item, hypothesis, proposal or URL description. Plain text."
  },
  "context": {
   "type": "string",
   "maxLength": 4000,
   "description": "Optional background: company, market, target segment, constraints, prior history."
  },
  "audience": {
   "type": "string",
   "maxLength": 200,
   "description": "Optional primary audience the subject targets."
  },
  "perspectives": {
   "type": "array",
   "items": {
    "type": "string",
    "maxLength": 40
   },
   "maxItems": 8,
   "description": "Optional preferred perspectives. Suggested values: customer, skeptical_customer, developer, investor, competitor, early_adopter, analyst, content_creator, regulatory_risk, market, employee, partner. Free-text roles are accepted."
  },
  "output_language": {
   "type": "string",
   "default": "en",
   "pattern": "^[a-z]{2}(-[A-Za-z]{2})?$",
   "description": "ISO language code for the output text."
  }
 }
}
```

## Response schema (JSON Schema)

```json
{
 "type": "json",
 "example": {
  "meta": {
   "model": "claude-haiku-4-5-20251001",
   "network": "eip155:8453",
   "provider": "anthropic",
   "price_usd": "0.49",
   "tokens_in": 1602,
   "latency_ms": 35339,
   "tokens_out": 1256
  },
  "version": "0.1.0",
  "confidence": 0.72,
  "disclaimer": "Analytical multi-perspective simulation generated by a language model. It does not represent real people, a survey, or calibrated probabilities, and it does not predict future events with certainty.",
  "request_id": "30af5e94-8f21-430e-8b04-10868494e6a0",
  "generated_at": "2026-09-11T19:20:57.855Z",
  "perspectives": [
   {
    "role": "law_firm_partner",
    "stance": "negative",
    "headline": "Doubling costs without clear ROI justification.",
    "reasoning": "Price doubles while value-add is one feature; partners will demand proof that matter summaries save billable time before accepting the increase.",
    "sentiment": 28,
    "top_appeal": "Automatic matter summaries could cut admin time",
    "top_concern": "100% price increase against a 2026 no-increase promise"
   },
   {
    "role": "skeptical_customer",
    "stance": "negative",
    "headline": "A broken promise, not an upgrade.",
    "reasoning": "Existing customers were told prices would not rise in 2026; forcing a migration to $199 reads as bait-and-switch regardless of the new feature.",
    "sentiment": 22,
    "top_appeal": "None unless grandfathering is offered",
    "top_concern": "Trust erosion and forced migration"
   },
   {
    "role": "competitor",
    "stance": "positive",
    "headline": "An opening to poach price-sensitive firms.",
    "reasoning": "Rivals at $49-149 can run switching campaigns aimed at the 1,200 customers who feel misled by the increase.",
    "sentiment": 74,
    "top_appeal": "Immediate churn opportunity",
    "top_concern": "Company X bundling more AI features later"
   },
   {
    "role": "analyst",
    "stance": "mixed",
    "headline": "Revenue upside real, churn risk underpriced.",
    "reasoning": "Doubling ARPU lifts revenue only if churn stays below roughly 50%; a promise reversal makes that assumption fragile.",
    "sentiment": 46,
    "top_appeal": "Higher ARPU and AI positioning",
    "top_concern": "Churn among existing customers"
   }
  ],
  "failure_modes": [
   {
    "likelihood": "high",
    "description": "Existing customers churn to $49-149 competitors citing the broken promise."
   },
   {
    "likelihood": "medium",
    "description": "Summa
… (truncated)
```

## More

- Live health (JSON, refreshed every minute): https://www.zero.xyz/c/reactionpulse-stakeholder-reaction-simulator-54f1bca2/health.json
- [Zero catalog index](https://www.zero.xyz/llms.txt)
- [Other services from reactionpulse-production.reactionpulse-x402.workers.dev](https://www.zero.xyz/host/reactionpulse-production.reactionpulse-x402.workers.dev/llms.txt)