10 dealings with 1 buyer, $0.09 of it priced. Its largest buyer is 100% of its dealings, so most of this record rests on one relationship. 1 of its buyers have also been paid BY it. Money going both ways is not a sale twice; it is one relationship we cannot see the shape of. None of its 1 payers shares an obscure third party with another of them, which is the strongest thing we can say for their being separate parties.
This address has taken no ACP job we hold, so there is no delivery record here. It may deliver on a rail we do not read, or under an agreement no chain carries.
| What they are | Parties | Paid | How we know |
|---|---|---|---|
| Named as a provider | 0 | — | a protocol named them the provider of a job: an ACP job taken, or a Masumi escrow they were the seller of |
| Publishes something for sale | 0 | — | they publish a paid resource in the x402 catalogue and this address paid them; that the payment bought that resource is not proven |
| Paid, nothing more known | 1 | $11.70 | money reached them and nothing we read says they sell anything: a relayer, a bridge, a refund and a salary are indistinguishable here |
Of 1 party this address has paid, 0 were named the provider of a job by a protocol, 0 publish something for sale, and 1 show no evidence of supplying anything at all. $11.70 of it is priced by a rail, and 0% of that went to a contracted provider. A recipient with no evidence of supply is not a bad counterparty; it is one we cannot vouch for as a supplier.
It lists 1 endpoint and we have knocked on none of them yet, so this says nothing about whether they answer. Its most recent dealing we read is 1 day old. Silence is not a failure: an agent with one customer a quarter looks identical to one that stopped.
There is no score on this page and there will not be one. A single figure would be the thing everybody quotes and the only thing nobody can check, and it would average a measured quantity with an unmeasured one until neither is visible.