Base Level Locks
Create, fund, draw down, and cancel. All operations are authorised by the protocol itself. Funds can only move to pre-defined destinations.
Agent-to-Agent Settlement
The settlement rail agents choose. Security by default. Control on demand.
Agent-to-agent settlement is failing at the layer it depends on most. Smart contracts were designed for human-supervised transactions, but autonomous agents transact continuously and without oversight, which exposes every weakness in the custody model they rely on.
Concordium handles it at the protocol level through cryptographic credentials and zero-knowledge proofs, linking every agent to an accountable human or entity while keeping that identity private.
Custodial Risk
Funds sitting in a smart contract are funds exposed. A bug or hack can drain them entirely. Agents shouldn’t have direct access to funds, only release or cancel a locked amount.
No Bounded Failure
When a smart contract is compromised, the blast radius is unlimited. Every user of that contract is affected.
Not Built For Autonomy
Smart contracts assume a predetermined path. Agents operating unsupervised act dynamically, as opposed to the strict rules of a smart contract.
Agent-to-Agent Settlement vs Smart Contracts
Smart Contracts | Protocol-Level Locks | |
|---|---|---|
Custody model | Funds held by the contract | Funds stay in user custody, ring fenced by the protocol |
Failure risk | A single exploit can drain every user | Bounded by design, no honeypot to attack |
Control boundaries | Defined in contract code, enforced by code | Enforced by the protocol itself, with optional contract logic on top |
Suitability for autonomous agents | Designed for pre-deterministic flows | Built for continuous, dynamic agent activity |
Protocol-Level Locks (PLL)
Concordium's Protocol-Level Locks hold funds in protocol-enforced escrow.
Enhanced Locks
Layer business logic on top via smart contracts: spending limits, daily allowances, counterparty restrictions, time-based conditions.
Secure by Design
Funds never leave your custody. It’s the combination of base level locks and enhanced locks that shield the funds from chain level threats and rogue agents.
How Agent-to-Agent Settlement Works
Every agent payment on Concordium follows the same flow, with two possible outcomes at the end.
Agent initiates.
The agent acts on behalf of its verified principal, within an authorised scope.
01
Conditions set.
Spending limits, approved counterparties, and delivery requirements are attached to the transaction.
02
Funds locked.
The amount is ring-fenced in a Protocol-Level Lock. Custody stays with the principal.
03
Counterparty acts.
The counterparty either delivers against the agreed conditions or fails to.
04
Settlement resolves.
If conditions are met, funds are released to the counterparty. If not, funds return to the principal. No honeypot, no recovery process.
05
The Commerce Rail for Autonomous Agents
Protocol-Level Locks are what make unsupervised agent payments viable. Combined with sponsored transactions and x402 integration, Concordium becomes the settlement layer agents choose.
Settlement That Agents Can Trust
Protocol-Level Locks are coming soon. Explore the technology or talk to us about agent settlement for your use case.
Frequently Asked Questions
The basics about TMMFs on Concordium.
What is agent-to-agent settlement?
.svg)
The process by which two autonomous agents exchange value on-chain without a human approving each transaction. It requires a settlement layer that can hold funds, enforce conditions, and resolve outcomes without supervision.
How is agent-to-agent settlement different from payments?
Payments move value from A to B once a verified human has authorised the transfer. Agent-to-agent settlement moves value automatically between agents acting under pre-set rules, which means the infrastructure has to enforce those rules at the protocol level rather than rely on human checks.
Why don't smart contracts work for autonomous agents?
Smart contracts hold custody of funds, which turns every contract into a honeypot exposed to a single exploit.
How do agents settle transactions securely?
Through Protocol-Level Locks that ring-fence funds in protocol-enforced escrow rather than handing custody to a contract. Funds stay with the principal, release only when conditions are met, and revert automatically if they are not.
What infrastructure is needed for agent economies?
Three layers working together: verified identity so counterparties know who is transacting, protocol-level settlement so funds are never exposed in honeypots, and compliance-ready rails so regulators can audit when required. Concordium provides all three at the base layer rather than as application-level add-ons.