Flow Diagrams
Three maps. Each one answers a question. Each answer feeds the next question. By the end, the Commerce Authorization Chain is visible as a dependency graph with coverage states at every node.
1 of 3
What does 80% coverage look like?
OUTCOME MAP
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
Every protocol interface is provably correct.
Coverage is computed from test results, not hand-counted.
Commerce Authorization Chain verified end-to-end.
│
├── Domain 1: Agent Communication (A2A + MCP)
│ ├── Current: 5/8 tested (63%)
│ ├── Target: 8/8 tested (100%)
│ └── Gap: Multi-agent chain, MCP tool access, capability search
│
├── Domain 2: Verifiable Intent
│ ├── Current: 0/6 tested (0%)
│ ├── Target: 4/6 tested (67%)
│ └── Gap: Intent capture, instruction fidelity, audit trail, HITL
│
├── Domain 3: Payment Execution (x402 + AP2)
│ ├── Current: 1/6 tested (17%)
│ ├── Target: 5/6 tested (83%)
│ └── Gap: Payment intent, spending authority, execution, x402
│
├── Domain 4: Identity & Verification
│ ├── Current: 2/5 tested (40%)
│ ├── Target: 3/5 tested (60%)
│ └── Gap: FIDO identity binding
│
├── Domain 5: On-Chain Trust
│ ├── Current: 0/4 tested (0%)
│ ├── Target: 3/4 tested (75%)
│ └── Gap: Sui escrow, settlement, attestation
│
└── Success measures (binary)
├── Coverage >= 80% (39/49) ────────── YES / NO
├── Commerce Auth Chain complete ────── YES / NO
├── Zero regressions in existing ────── YES / NO
└── Coverage computed, not counted ──── YES / NO
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════Targets defined. Where does value flow from spec to trust? ↓
2 of 3
How does a protocol become trusted?
VALUE STREAM MAP
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
[Protocol Specification — A2A, MCP, AP2, UCP, VI, x402]
│
▼
1. DOCUMENT 1-3 hrs wait: 0 docs/software/protocols/
Write protocol doc ──────────────────────────────────────────────────
│ 8 docs written, 7 have depth, 1 stub (MCP)
▼
2. CONTRACT 1-2 hrs wait: 0-1 DAY contracts/<domain>/
Zod schema ──────────░░░░░────────────────────────────────
│ 20 contracts exist, 10 missing
▼
3. TEST SPEC 2-8 hrs wait: 1-3 DAYS intents/<domain>/
Write test ──────────░░░░░░░░░░░░░────────────────────────
│ external deps (FIDO, Sui) add wait time
▼
4. TROPHY LAYER 0 hrs wait: 0 PROTOCOL-COVERAGE.md
Assign L1-L3 ──────────────────────────────────────────────────
│ Automated — test passes = trophy assigned
▼
5. COVERAGE % never wait: ∞ NO SCRIPT EXISTS
Compute + surface ──────────────────────── STEP 5 NEVER HAPPENS ──
│
▼
[Trust claimed in docs. Not computed from evidence.]
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Protocols documented: 8/8 (100%) │
│ Contracts written: ~39/49 (80%) │
│ Tests passing: 20/49 (41%) │
│ Coverage computed: 0% (no script) │
│ THE WASTE ISN'T DOCUMENTATION. IT'S THE GAP BETWEEN │
│ DOCUMENTATION AND VERIFICATION. │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════41% verified. Step 5 never happens. The gap between docs and proof is where trust dies.
The value stream is clear. What depends on what? ↓
3 of 3
What gates what?
COMMERCE AUTHORIZATION CHAIN — DEPENDENCY MAP
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
Every agent-to-agent transaction requires this chain to be correct:
USER AUTH (FIDO) Domain 4: Identity
"Who authorized" 2/5 tested ──── PARTIAL
│
▼
INTENT CAPTURE Domain 2: Verifiable Intent
"What they said" 0/6 tested ──── MISSING ◄── CRITICAL GAP
│
▼
AGENT ACTION Domain 1: Agent Communication
"What agent did" 5/8 tested ──── PARTIAL
│
▼
SETTLEMENT Domain 3: Payment + Domain 5: On-Chain
"Value moved" 1/10 tested ─── MISSING ◄── CRITICAL GAP
│
▼
AUDIT Domain 2: Verifiable Intent (audit trail)
"Proof exists" 0/6 tested ──── MISSING ◄── CRITICAL GAP
Dependencies:
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Identity (D4) ──gates──► Intent (D2) │
│ Intent (D2) ──gates──► Communication (D1) │
│ Communication (D1) ──gates──► Payment (D3) + On-Chain (D5) │
│ Payment (D3) + On-Chain (D5) ──gates──► Audit (D2) │
│ │
│ The chain is only as strong as its weakest link. │
│ Three MISSING domains = three broken links. │
│ Priority: D2 (Intent) first — it gates everything below. │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════Domain 2 (Verifiable Intent) gates the entire commerce chain. Start there.
The outcome defines success. The value stream reveals the bottleneck. The dependency map names the priority.