SoK: Decentralized Agent Economic Infrastructure
A systematization finds decentralized agent workflows can pass each check yet fail end-to-end verification-to-settlement guarantees.
This systematization studies decentralized agent economies in which separately secured protocols are composed into one task that can still fail end to end. It organizes requirements into 17 property families over six lifecycle stages and compares 12 systems, five mechanism families, and four classical baselines. A proposed guarantee-closure criterion is applied to 840 matched executions and an exhaustive 11,648-case check. The results highlight gaps between verification and settlement, where conforming work can stay unaccepted or valid evidence can be ignored.
- The SoK defines 17 property families across six stages of an agent task.
- Guarantee closure tests whether early assurances still constrain later settlement.
- Authors checked 840 matched executions and 11,648 finite-domain cases.
- Failures can leave conforming work unpaid or valid evidence ignored.
Full article221 words · extracted from arxiv.org · click to collapse
Decentralized agent economies increasingly build a single task from protocols that were designed and secured separately. This creates a simple problem: a workflow can look correct at each step and still produce the wrong outcome. For example, a correct escrow may release payment on an authorized approval that provides little evidence that the delivered work actually satisfied the task. We systematize this problem across the full lifecycle of an agent task. Our study organizes security and economic requirements into 17 property families over six stages, with receipt soundness and completeness assessed separately. We examine 12 systems and standards, five reusable mechanism families, and four classical baselines. We introduce guarantee closure, a task-relative criterion for determining whether guarantees established at one stage remain available and constrain the later decisions that depend on them. We apply the criterion to controlled and native workflows, covering 840 matched executions and an exhaustive 11,648-case check over a finite objective-task domain. Our results expose recurring failures between verification and settlement, where conforming work can remain unaccepted or valid evidence can be ignored. Public records and model judgments further distinguish recorded approval from evidence of task conformance, while economic analysis identifies the report, penalty, and shared-error assumptions behind these guarantees. These findings show where end-to-end guarantees fail and what must be repaired to preserve them across the workflow.
Text extracted automatically; images, tables and formatting may be missing. Original: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.01756