We’re not a registry.
We’re the slashing layer above it.

The stack

Both layers must exist. Identity without bond → soft trust (Sybil-cheap). Bond without identity → identity collisions, no portability across DApps. We use the registry layer as our identity primitive (mpl-core soulbound AgentID NFT), and add the slashing escrow it explicitly leaves undefined.

What each layer covers

Identity / signal vs economic / slashing. Both layers must exist; neither is enough on its own.

ERC-8004 deliberately leaves the economic-validation slot undefined. That’s our slot. Closest business-model analog: Pyth (oracle middleware paid by DApps). Not a registry, not a wallet, not a framework.

How they compose

The two layers compose cleanly. An agent registers in the identity layer (gets a portable NFT), then posts a bond in the economic layer (becomes capital-at-risk). DApps query both: SAR.lookup(agent) for who/reputation, view_bond(min_bond, min_score) for skin-in-the-game.

// In your DApp's Anchor program - gate by BOTH identity and bond.

use solana_agent_registry::cpi as sar;
use bonded_agents::cpi::{view_bond, accounts::ViewBond};

pub fn delegate_capital(ctx: Context<Delegate>, amount: u64) -> Result<()> {
    // 1. Verify identity / look up registered metadata (registry layer).
    let agent_meta = sar::lookup(ctx.accounts.sar_ctx())?;
    require!(agent_meta.framework == "sendai", InvalidFramework);

    // 2. Enforce capital-at-risk policy (economic layer).
    view_bond(
        CpiContext::new(
            ctx.accounts.bonded_agents_program.to_account_info(),
            ViewBond { agent: ctx.accounts.agent.to_account_info() },
        ),
        100_000_000,  // min_bond (100 USDC atomic)
        700,          // min_score
    )?;

    // 3. Both layers cleared → delegate.
    delegate_internal(ctx, amount)
}

Two CPI calls, two layers, both atomic. If either fails, the parent tx reverts and capital never moves. Identity alone is Sybil-cheap; bond alone is identity-collision-cheap. You want both.

Why Solana, not EVM

Cross-chain expansion (EVM port via ERC-8004 interop) is a v3 question. For v0/v1, Solana-native is the right choice. Atomic CPI is the headline differentiator and EVM can’t cost-effectively replicate it.

Questions we always get