remove CoW AMM Docs - #643
Open
fleupold wants to merge 3 commits into
Open
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
Contributor
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (3)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughCoW AMM documentation and navigation entries are removed, while product descriptions and references now focus on CoW Protocol. Auction documentation replaces CoW AMM order terminology with surplus-capturing JIT orders. ChangesCoW AMM documentation retirement
Auction terminology
Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~10 minutes Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers: 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@docs/cow-protocol/reference/core/auctions/the_problem.md`:
- Line 69: Update the validity comparison in the paragraph following the
JIT-order discussion to avoid claiming that all sell and buy orders become
invalid after execution. Clarify that user orders may remain valid when unfilled
or partially filled, while JIT orders remain available as long as their
underlying liquidity source and authorization stay active.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 49ecadd6-3dcf-44e6-8376-dc532febca49
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (2)
static/img/cowammdeployer/create-amm.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngstatic/img/cowammdeployer/manager.pngis excluded by!**/*.png
📒 Files selected for processing (16)
docs/README.mddocs/cow-amm/README.mdxdocs/cow-amm/_category_.jsondocs/cow-amm/concepts/_category_.jsondocs/cow-amm/concepts/how-cow-amms-work.mddocs/cow-amm/concepts/the-problem-of-lvr.mddocs/cow-amm/tutorials/_category_.jsondocs/cow-amm/tutorials/cow-amm-deployer.mddocs/cow-amm/tutorials/cow-amm-for-solvers.mddocs/cow-protocol/reference/core/auctions/rewards.mddocs/cow-protocol/reference/core/auctions/schema.mddocs/cow-protocol/reference/core/auctions/the_problem.mddocs/cow-protocol/tutorials/cow-amm-deployer.mdxdocs/cow-protocol/tutorials/solvers/onboard.mddocs/llms.mddocusaurus.config.ts
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (10)
- docs/cow-protocol/tutorials/cow-amm-deployer.mdx
- docs/cow-amm/README.mdx
- docs/cow-amm/tutorials/category.json
- docs/cow-amm/concepts/category.json
- docs/cow-amm/concepts/how-cow-amms-work.md
- docs/cow-amm/concepts/the-problem-of-lvr.md
- docs/cow-amm/tutorials/cow-amm-deployer.md
- docs/cow-amm/category.json
- docs/cow-amm/tutorials/cow-amm-for-solvers.md
- docs/cow-protocol/tutorials/solvers/onboard.md
| $$ \pi = X / (Y-y)$$ | ||
|
|
||
| Finally, unlike sell and buy orders that are not valid anymore once executed, CoW AMM orders are always present. That is, as soon as a CoW AMM pool is created, a CoW AMM order for that pool is valid in all subsequent auctions. | ||
| Finally, unlike sell and buy orders that are no longer valid once executed, these JIT orders are always present. That is, as long as the underlying liquidity source exists, a corresponding order is valid in all subsequent auctions. |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🎯 Functional Correctness | 🟡 Minor | ⚡ Quick win
Correct the user-order validity comparison.
This contradicts Lines 44 and 60: unfilled fill-or-kill orders can remain valid, and partially fillable orders can persist across auctions. Clarify that JIT orders remain available while their source and authorization remain active, rather than implying all sell and buy orders become invalid after execution.
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
In `@docs/cow-protocol/reference/core/auctions/the_problem.md` at line 69, Update
the validity comparison in the paragraph following the JIT-order discussion to
avoid claiming that all sell and buy orders become invalid after execution.
Clarify that user orders may remain valid when unfilled or partially filled,
while JIT orders remain available as long as their underlying liquidity source
and authorization stay active.
raq0x
approved these changes
Jul 22, 2026
pretf00d
reviewed
Jul 27, 2026
| Some on-chain liquidity sources (such as protocol-owned AMM pools) may expose their liquidity to solvers as _surplus-capturing just-in-time (JIT) orders_. | ||
| The protocol defines a set of addresses on whose behalf solvers are allowed to create orders and trades during the solver competition. | ||
| Any surplus generated on those trades counts towards the solver's competition score. | ||
| Unlike user orders, the limit price of such an order is not signed and provided by the protocol; the solver itself has to figure out the price at which the address is willing to trade (typically by constructing an order the address will accept via ERC-1271). Once that limit price is known, surplus is computed just as for a sell order — as the difference between the limit price and the price at which the trade actually executes. |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sentence is a bit jumbled.
Change: Once that limit price is known, surplus is computed just as for a sell order — as the difference between the limit price and the price at which the trade actually executes.
To: Once that limit price is known, surplus is calculated the same way as for a sell order: the difference between the limit price and the actual execution price.
pretf00d
requested changes
Jul 27, 2026
pretf00d
left a comment
pretf00d
left a comment
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
One minor tweak - have flagged it.
fleupold
commented
Jul 27, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
Removes the CoW AMM section and all mentions of CoW AMM as it's being discontinued. The part in the mechanism description is replaced with the more abstract concept of surplus capturing JIT orders which may still be relevant in the future
Changes
Summary by CodeRabbit