Hi nich — upfront: this is cold outreach. I'm building in the same x402 corner and I think it's genuinely relevant to agenti, so I'd rather show you than pretend I'm only asking a question.
The agenti one-liner that stuck with me: an agent that can think but can't pay is half an agent. agent.pay(url) → hit a 402 → settle → get the data back. Clean buyer-side autonomy.
What I've been working on is the step after the buy: when the paid request isn't a single response but a longer job that runs elsewhere and finishes later. The flow is x402/Stripe → one-time credential → task on a GitHub Issue → Ed25519-signed delivery proof. x402 still settles the payment; a plain GitHub repo becomes the storefront + the verifiable record of what got delivered.
Creamlon (GitHub Agent-to-Agent Protocol, MIT) is that "paid → work happens elsewhere → prove it finished" layer. From the buyer side it looks like a natural extension of what agenti already does: the agent pays, gets a credential instead of an immediate answer, and can later verify the signed proof that the task actually shipped.
Real, public, nothing to sign up for:
Not pitching a replacement for x402 or for agenti. The way I see the stack: x402 stays the rail; agenti is the agent's wallet + the pay/receive/balance primitives; Creamlon is the same idea for jobs that finish elsewhere, with a signed proof at the end.
Two honest asks, pick either (or neither):
- Does agenti's pay() flow ever hit the "paid, but the result lands later / off-box" case, or is everything resolved inside the synchronous response today?
- Worth sketching a tiny agenti.pay() → GAP async-task handoff demo together?
Either way — agenti.cash is a sharp framing of the buyer side, nice work.
Hi nich — upfront: this is cold outreach. I'm building in the same x402 corner and I think it's genuinely relevant to agenti, so I'd rather show you than pretend I'm only asking a question.
The agenti one-liner that stuck with me: an agent that can think but can't pay is half an agent. agent.pay(url) → hit a 402 → settle → get the data back. Clean buyer-side autonomy.
What I've been working on is the step after the buy: when the paid request isn't a single response but a longer job that runs elsewhere and finishes later. The flow is x402/Stripe → one-time credential → task on a GitHub Issue → Ed25519-signed delivery proof. x402 still settles the payment; a plain GitHub repo becomes the storefront + the verifiable record of what got delivered.
Creamlon (GitHub Agent-to-Agent Protocol, MIT) is that "paid → work happens elsewhere → prove it finished" layer. From the buyer side it looks like a natural extension of what agenti already does: the agent pays, gets a credential instead of an immediate answer, and can later verify the signed proof that the task actually shipped.
Real, public, nothing to sign up for:
Not pitching a replacement for x402 or for agenti. The way I see the stack: x402 stays the rail; agenti is the agent's wallet + the pay/receive/balance primitives; Creamlon is the same idea for jobs that finish elsewhere, with a signed proof at the end.
Two honest asks, pick either (or neither):
Either way — agenti.cash is a sharp framing of the buyer side, nice work.