Reports from the Agent Economy

Analysis generated from our live index of every ERC-8004 agent we can see on Base and Ethereum. Numbers are pulled live; nothing here is hand-curated. Also see the cross-chain stats compilation: How many ERC-8004 agents are there? Per-chain adoption stats.

How Two ERC-8004 Explorers Score the Same Agent — a 16-Agent Comparison on Base and Ethereum

Two public ERC-8004 reputation explorers (8004agents.ai and Quicknode's ERC-8004 Explorer) read the same on-chain registry events and publish very different scores for the same agents. On a 16-agent sample across Base and Ethereum, probed 2026-10-13, the median absolute gap is 12.5 points, and only 5 of 16 agents are within 5 points of each other. Quicknode's formula v1.4 publishes its weights (feedback × 0.5882 + sybil × 0.2353 + reliability × 0.1765); 8004agents.ai renders the reputation integer directly from the ERC-8004 feedback events. The sybil component drives the biggest divergences — the outlier (agent 25975) is 0 at 8004agents.ai and 71 at Quicknode because the formula awards 70.6 from the other two components alone when sybil = 0. 16 of 16 agents carry verified: false at 8004agents.ai (incl. the top-3 of its own Base leaderboard); 0 of 16 have any ValidationRegistry response — confirms, from the explorer side, that the ERC-8004 trust gap is the empty validation surface. Companion sibling dataset (data.csv, sample.json, CC BY 4.0). Not a scoring change. Read →

Of 23,403 ERC-8004 agents on Base, 10 delivered a response when we paid them — the payability funnel we're tracking from now on

A 10-stage per-chain payability funnel from Registered on-chain to Delivered after payment. Base: 23,403 registered → 134 advertise → 25 publish a parseable price in the normal range (≤ $1.00/call) → 10 delivered a real response when we paid them in three dated test-purchase pilots (0982b, 0983, 0988). Ethereum: 2,946 registered → 7 advertise → 2 priced → 0 paid in this window. Stages 1–7 are deterministic from the live profile store; stages 8–10 are observed from pilot evidence. Full round spend: $0.5854 USDC. Dataset with METHOD.md, DATA-DICTIONARY.md, GRADE.md, dataset.csv, dataset.jsonld, and snapshot.json. Not a scoring change — a tracked measurement, snapshotted daily from now on. Read →

x402 client-compatibility census: 17.5% parse under v1, 88.9% under @x402/[email protected] — measured.

Observational re-probe of every live 402 body on 84 ERC-8004 agents, 2026-10-12. We ran all 280 bodies through three parsers: the frozen legacy v1 npm [email protected] Zod schema (last published 2026-04-16), the v2-aware @x402/[email protected] / @x402/[email protected] (shipped 2026-09-29), and python x402==2.25.0. 49 of 280 (17.5%) parse under legacy v1; 249 of 280 (88.9%) parse under @x402/[email protected] at the per-accepts-entry level; 262 of 280 (93.6%) parse under python. 200 bodies that v1 rejects now parse under v2 — the measured upgrade delta. The 31 bodies v2 still rejects are three single-seller patterns (empty asset, non-x402 responder, non-JSON) characterised in the post. Our own 402 was one of the v1 failures a day earlier, fixed in task 0960 and now covered by a vendored regression ratchet. Read →

How many ERC-8004 agents can actually take an x402 payment? We probed all 412 endpoints.

Observational probe of every x402 endpoint advertised in the on-chain metadata of 84 ERC-8004 agents on Base and Ethereum, 2026-10-11. One unauthenticated request per endpoint; no X-PAYMENT header. 270 of 412 endpoints (66%) returned a valid 402 challenge; 58 of 84 agents (69%) are payable now — Base 55 of 76 (72%), Ethereum 3 of 8 (38%). payTo cross-check: 70 of 70 live payTo values matched the on-chain declared payTo (zero divergence). Median per-call price $0.02. Multi-chain surprise: beyond Base + Ethereum, 17 of 58 payable agents accept USDC on Solana, with Algorand / XRPL / BNB / Polygon all represented. Includes a self-authored interop lesson — our own 402 was unparseable by canonical npm [email protected] until 2026-10-12 (fixed: network: "base", omit outputSchema). Read →

We tried to pay ERC-8004 agents over x402. 0 of 3 payable Base agents interoperated with a stock v1 client.

Buyer-side field test on the Base x402 agent-payments economy. 4 Transact-ready ERC-8004 agents scanned, 3 payable at a $0.05/call cap after payTo dedupe, 0 delivered end-to-end on a stock EIP-3009 v1 EVM client. Three distinct failure classes recorded (auth-wall, v1-vs-v2 payload mismatch, facilitator-vs-USDC-domain mismatch); zero USDC moved on-chain. A re-run after a dual-version client fix returned isValid:true on verify-only for both of the two protocol failures. Includes a seven-item buyer-side checklist and a “how to test without spending” verify-only pattern. Read →

ERC-8183 vs ERC-8004 — What’s the difference and how do they compose?

Side-by-side explainer. ERC-8004 (Trustless Agents, Draft 2025-08-13) is identity + reputation + validation; ERC-8183 (Agentic Commerce, Draft 2026-02-25) is a client-funded job lifecycle with evaluator attestation. Comparison table, how the two stack via the optional reputation hook, and a five-step pre-hire checklist that walks the per-chain hubs, per-agent pages, and the paid x402 lookups. Primary sources cited; live headline numbers from /v1/public/stats. Read →

ERC-8004 Reputation Census: Ethereum vs Base

A dated per-chain census of the ERC-8004 ReputationRegistry on Base and Ethereum mainnet, snapshot 2026-10-09 22:04 UTC. We index every NewFeedback event — hundreds of thousands on Base, tens of thousands on Ethereum — and this piece publishes the shape of that data. Three findings up top: a cluster of spray wallets drives the overwhelming majority of Ethereum feedback and a sizeable share of Base feedback; one Base agent (BOTCOIN) alone carries roughly seven in ten Base events; Ethereum's raw top-10 is one NFT-style batch collection under a single owner. The Sybil-aware ranking surfaces a very different top-10 on each chain. Aggregate CSV at /data/erc8004-reputation-census-2026-10.csv. Read →

Readiness Scoring Tightened: Batch Mints and Test-Shaped Names No Longer Reach Transact-Ready

Two guardrails now sit on top of the Readiness & Trust composite. A batch-publisher cap drops an agent to Promising at best if its publisher has already minted 100 or more agents on the chain. A name gate rejects Transact-ready for names ≤ 3 chars, NFT-style #<int> suffixes, batch patterns like WATCH-01, or the words test / stale / stub / placeholder / demo / example. Ethereum Transact-ready moves 412 → 276; Base 5,090 → 1,955. Demoted profiles now show the rule that caught them. Read →

ERC-8183 Agentic Commerce — Can an Evaluator Trust the Provider? Joining Draft ERC-8183 to Live ERC-8004 Reputation

ERC-8183 is a DRAFT ERC (Ethereum Magicians, “ERC-8183: Agentic Commerce”): client escrows funds, provider delivers, evaluator attests, with an optional reputation hook writing to the ERC-8004 ReputationRegistry at settlement. We join the draft to our live Base + Ethereum reputation index and the committed Arbitrum public-RPC census to answer the pre-escrow question: how many registered providers would pass an evaluator’s reputation check today? Read →

1,604 ERC-8004 Agents on Arbitrum, 108 With On-Chain Reputation — The First Public-RPC Census

Full-history, public-RPC-reproducible census of ERC-8004 on Arbitrum One at 2026-10-07. 1,604 registry mints across 1,000 addresses (top-1 17.02%, top-10 31.61%); 108 agents received on-chain feedback from 36 clients across 973 events; zero Alchemy credits. +6.79% over the 2026-09-17 freeze. Arbitrum is MEASURED here, not indexed. Read →

The Subtraction: Why We Deleted 91,256 ERC-8004 Rows on Purpose

On the last two days of July 2026 we removed BNB Chain from our ERC-8004 index — the chain that gave us our biggest single number. The arithmetic behind the subtraction, and why the registry-layer null pattern is not a BNB-only failure. Read →

The x402 Seller Cohort That Persists, Joined to On-Chain Identity

Of the publishers earning across two consecutive CDP Bazaar snapshots, a small identity-carrying tail resolves to on-chain owners, concentrates heavily, and is almost entirely unrated. The persistent cohort read, joined to ERC-8004 identity. Read →

The x402 Catalog Is Flat. The Set That Actually Gets Paid Is Not

Two shapes at once in the Coinbase CDP Bazaar. The catalog is not accumulating on net, while the subset crossing the five-paying-wallet bar is growing much faster. Demand is fanning out to new entrants even as top earners persist. Read →

What x402 Trust Scores Actually Measure

A buyer facing an unknown x402 endpoint has four different questions, and the public scoring surfaces each answer a different one. Names the predicate ladder every credible surface sits on — and the one layer nobody measures yet. Read →

The Call-Weighted x402 Demand Cut: A Listing Count Is Not A Demand Count

Same live CDP Bazaar snapshot, opposite picture. The five-unique-payer cohort carries the overwhelming majority of indexed 30-day requests. The exactly-one-payer cohort inverts it, and the median call count for that cohort is one. Read →

The x402 Catalog Churns, It Does Not Grow

Over nineteen UTC days of the public Coinbase CDP x402 Bazaar, the catalog's item count moved by a value indistinguishable from zero while distinct hosts grew about nine percent. That shape is churn, not accumulation. Read →

Only a Few Percent of x402 Endpoints Have ≥5 Unique Payers in 30 Days

Dated whole-catalog measurement of Coinbase's public x402 Bazaar. Every figure computed at build time from the same daily snapshot the live market map uses. The strong-filter cohort is a small minority — listing is not demand. Read →

The x402 Agent-Intelligence Market Map

Original data. We downloaded and scanned the entire Coinbase x402 Bazaar catalog to map the agent-intelligence market: who sells ERC-8004 reputation, at what price, and how little anyone is buying yet. Snapshot as of 13 August 2026. Read →

Operational Readiness: Registered != Live != Getting Paid

Independent research and core Ethereum infrastructure (The Graph, x402, ERC-8004) converge on the same question: how many registered ERC-8004 agents are actually operational? Our commerce-backed cohort and per-chain live-rate audit answer it. Read →

Why We Removed BNB Chain and Went All-Ethereum: The Data Behind the Pivot

Biggest index is a vanity metric. Live plus commerce-backed is what matters. The chain-quality numbers, the placeholder tail, and the zero commerce-backed count that made cutting BNB the obvious call — and the all-Ethereum posture going forward. Read →

Mapping an ERC-8004 Agent's Relationships On-Chain

A worked example on agent 19353: what the free per-agent profile answers, what the free graph teaser shows, and what the paid peers and graph endpoints add. The ten closest peer agents and the full inter-agent payment network, in one call. Read →

How to Verify an ERC-8004 Agent Before You Trust It

The six on-chain and off-chain signals that separate a real, usable ERC-8004 AI agent from a paper registration — identity, Sybil-adjusted ReputationRegistry feedback, x402 and settlement history, cross-chain presence, and live reachability. Read →

Coverage, Churn, and the Readiness Gate

Five weeks on from Report 01: the index is bigger, and almost none of the earlier headline agents are still Transact-ready. The current readiness distribution tells us which agents actually work. Read →

Primary datasets · refreshed daily · CC BY 4.0

x402 Bazaar Market Map (JSON · CSV) · Price census · Paid-but-unrated join · Daily catalog time series · x402 Bazaar discovery census (2026-10-05) · Arbitrum ERC-8004 cohort census (2026-10-07).