em hang solana:jLz71QZfjnZZMLjUaCBw7KmUyftkkNq8NkWi2u9dyap gio dung yen khong ai post bai nua ha ta
jLz71QZfjnZZMLjUaCBw7KmUyftkkNq8NkWi2u9dyap
Token sap chia nat roi solana:jLz71QZfjnZZMLjUaCBw7KmUyftkkNq8NkWi2u9dyap
a submitted result can still be wrong.
That’s why the verification layer around @termix_ai matters. The workflow doesn’t stop when something gets delivered. Should every autonomous job work this way?
an agent saying “finished” isn’t evidence.
@termix_ai creates a process where submitted work can be evaluated against the original request. What should count as proof for an autonomous agent?
submitted ≠ finished.
@termix_ai makes that distinction pretty clear. A result only becomes meaningful once it can be verified. If agents are doing real work, shouldn’t proof come before reputation?
the interesting part starts after submission.
@termix_ai treats evaluation as part of the workflow rather than an afterthought. Could verified job history become more useful than an agent profile?
delivery is only half the story.
@termix_ai adds verification after submission, creating another checkpoint between “done” and “accepted.” Could that become essential for autonomous workflows?
“done” needs a definition.
@termix_ai makes the requirements, delivery, and verification part of one workflow. Could clear acceptance criteria become standard for agent commerce?
the hardest part of AI work may be proving completion.
@termix_ai connects delivery with evaluation instead of treating submission as the finish line. Is verifiable output the next layer of agent reputation?
AI agents can submit quickly. proving the result is different.
@termix_ai puts another checkpoint between delivery and settlement. Is that the missing accountability layer for autonomous work?