Prepare offchain
Read documents and propose an action. Input quality and data access still need a policy.
VITALIK'S VISION → AN APPLICATION DESIGN EXERCISE
The evidence passes.
Should the payment?
An agent prepares a supplier payment. Change one assumption and see what the application still needs to check.
Local rules + mock proof result. No ZK, Ethereum connection, AI execution or real funds.
01 / CHOOSE WHAT GOES WRONG
Choose a scenario, then test it.
FICTIONAL PAYMENT REQUEST
- Amount
- Requested recipient
- Evidence recipient
- Approved supplier
- Active limit
- 500 mock units
02 / INSPECT THE DECISION
Ready to test.
No request has been evaluated yet.
03 / MAKE THE RESPONSIBILITIES VISIBLE
Check evidence
Specify the statement and bind it to the exact action. A hash or signature is not a proof of computation.
Enforce the effect
Check current permission, state and replay protection where the real action executes.
What this lab does and does not demonstrate
All checks run in JavaScript. A scenario supplies a mock verifier result; no cryptographic proof is produced or verified. Values and permissions are fictional, request history is preset, and no data is sent or persisted. A passing scenario means only that the selected local checks pass. It is not a production security claim.
This application exercise is our interpretation, not an implementation of EIP-8288, FOCIL or Vitalik's roadmap. Read Vitalik's original essay. The source-policy check cannot establish real-world truth. A production system must enforce authority and replay protection atomically in its authoritative execution layer.