Proves✓
Deterministic result
The normalized inputs reproduce the listed checks, outcome and domain-separated SHA-256 digest under engine version 1.0.0.
01 / Working technology
Evidence in. Verifiable receipt out.
PactVerity's operational browser engine applies published deterministic rules to measurable service evidence, creates a portable SHA-256 receipt and re-verifies imported receipts locally.
EngineWorking MVPFunds movedNoneWallet proofOptional
Loading the deterministic verification engine…
04 / What it proves
Consistency and key control—within clear limits.
The verifier exposes what can be recomputed and what still requires trusted evidence collection or on-chain enforcement.
Optional⌁
Wallet key control
A valid Ed25519 signature proves that the corresponding Solana key signed that exact receipt digest. It does not prove a real-world identity, role or evidence source.
Does not prove×
Evidence truth
The MVP does not independently collect evidence, establish trusted time, confirm service delivery, move funds or execute a refund.
05 / How verification works
A four-stage, replayable evidence path.
The engine keeps agreement terms, observations and decisions separate so another verifier can inspect each stage.
01Terms
Define measurable conditions
The receipt identifies the service and records explicit criteria: maximum latency, minimum uptime, maximum evidence age and an optional expected output commitment. Values use fixed units rather than ambiguous prose.
02Evidence
Supply bounded observations
The current MVP accepts caller-supplied measurements and an observation time. It validates field shape and limits, but it does not claim that PactVerity independently collected the measurements.
03Checks
Evaluate every rule
Engine v1 applies the published comparisons and preserves each individual result. A final outcome therefore remains explainable instead of hiding behind a single score.
04Receipt
Canonicalise and commit
The engine normalises the record, applies domain separation and calculates a SHA-256 digest. Importing the receipt repeats the checks and commitment so later alteration becomes detectable.
06 / Where it fits
Verification for agents, APIs and measurable digital work.
The model is most useful when service terms can be represented as objective conditions and the evidence source is disclosed.
An AI agent can retain a receipt after calling a paid API, requesting a data product or completing an automated workflow. A platform operator can attach the same structure to an incident review. A buyer and provider can compare the individual checks without relying on screenshots from either party.
The receipt does not replace monitoring, identity, authorisation, contracts or dispute procedures. Those systems can strengthen the evidence boundary, but they remain separate responsibilities. PactVerity deliberately reports this distinction so a deterministic result is not mistaken for independent certification.
For API builders
Expose measurable delivery evidence and let integrators retain a versioned, machine-readable result.
Read the API SLA guideFor agent operators
Preserve the policy, evidence and decision path surrounding consequential automated work.
Read the audit-trail guideImplementation boundary