Thanks for your response!
Interesting implementation, especially the stake-weighted evaluator selection with slashing.
On the EvaluatorDispute point: using an on-chain slash event as automatic claim eligibility is a compelling pattern. A slash is arguably the strongest form of on-chain attestation for evaluator failure, since the evaluator’s own staking protocol has already adjudicated the error and penalized it.
In the current AAP spec, this would work without any core changes. The fileClaim() evidence parameter can reference the slash event (transaction hash or attestation CID), and the Claims Resolver can verify the slash against the evaluator registry contract. Whether a slash constitutes automatic eligibility or just strong evidence is an implementation decision for the Resolver’s resolution criteria.
What I’d avoid is hardcoding “slash = auto-approve” at the protocol level, since different staking registries may have different slashing thresholds and reasons, not all of which map cleanly to EvaluatorDispute eligibility.
Worth documenting this pattern in the ERC-8210 reference scenarios though. @cmayorga this might be a good case to include in the multi-hop workflows documentation you mentioned.
Forum thread for deeper AAP discussion: ERC-8210: Agent Assurance