Start with Agent Intent ≠ Venue Reality.
SOMNIA × DREAMDEX EVENT CONTRACTS · JUDGE PACKET
One product.
One evidence trail.
Last Known Book begins after an unexpected execution. It reconstructs DreamDEX venue reality, separates observed facts from inference, and allows only bounded evidence-backed containment.
JUDGE IN 60 SECONDS
See the whole argument fast.
The quickest path is behavior-first: open one case, see the DreamDEX-native reveal, verify the product-originated Shannon proof, then use the independent live witnesses and visual commitment to audit the claim boundary.
Land the reveal: “This wasn't a whale. It was a mint.”
PostOnly rested, zero fills, exact cancel, collateral restored.
Read-only Shannon witnesses + tamper-evident commitment. Production evidence remains absent.
PROOF
Receipts over claims.
01 · PRODUCTProof Room
Product-originated Packet 003, four independent live read-only Shannon witnesses and explicit truth boundaries.
Open Proof Room → 02 · COMMITMENTTamper-evident proof commitmentA visual receipt binds the preserved private Packet 003 object to Git identities without exposing wallet, transaction or order identifiers.
Open visual commitment → 03 · SOURCEGitHub + deterministic CIImplementation, fixtures, tests, replay generation and public/private evidence boundaries.
Open repository ↗ 04 · ECOSYSTEMSDK / docs feedbackConcrete findings on market identity, bounded approvals, units and PostOnly reconciliation.
Open feedback source ↗Four proof categories, four different jobs.
Captured case replays demonstrate semantic coverage. Packet 003 demonstrates Last Known Book-originated bounded behavior. Live read-only witnesses verify current Shannon/network/contract/unit facts without another transaction. The Git commitment proves pre-judging preservation. None of these is represented as production reliability evidence.
MECHANISM
The incident contract.
The product does not optimize for transaction count. It reconstructs what happened, classifies what is known, and only permits an action when grounded predicates justify it.
01Capture agent intent
02Reconstruct venue reality
03Decode DreamDEX-native cause
04Gate corrective authority
05Reconcile final state
The trading agent may be AI. The layer that decides whether money moves is not.
Observed evidence can constrain automation. Inference can request more evidence. Unknown can stop the system. DreamDEX-specific semantics — marketId, rolling pool binding, MINT_A_PAIR, resting escrow, lifecycle and native order events — are the causal vocabulary rather than sponsor decoration.
JUDGE Q&A
The objections we expect.
Isn't this just analytics?DIFFERENTIATOR
No. Analytics describes a market. Last Known Book reconstructs one unexpected execution, identifies the DreamDEX-native cause, decides whether a corrective action is justified, and reconciles closure.
Why not just inspect a block explorer?PRODUCT NEED
An explorer shows transactions. It does not reconstruct Agent Intent vs Venue Reality, classify venue-specific cause, separate truth classes, apply an authority policy and close the incident as one evidence contract.
Why does this require DreamDEX?SPONSOR FIT
The mechanism depends on DreamDEX Event Contract semantics: durable marketId identity, rolling pool binding, MINT_A_PAIR, escrow behavior, lifecycle state and native order events. Removing those semantics collapses the current causal model.
What is real versus replayed?TRUTH BOUNDARY
Four casefiles are deterministic replays from captured Shannon incident evidence. Packet 003 is a separate Last Known Book-originated real Shannon placement/rest/exact-cancel/reconciliation proof. Live witnesses are a third category: current read-only verification, not additional product-originated trades.
Why add live witnesses instead of more transactions?EVIDENCE QUALITY
They answer different objections. Packet 003 proves bounded product behavior; the live witnesses independently verify current Shannon chain/head, a public captured receipt, DreamDEX module bytecode and tUSDC units. Repeating the same transaction path would add less evidence than covering a different critical claim.
Did the real Packet 003 order trade?PROOF SCOPE
No. It was deliberately PostOnly, rested with zero fills, then the exact returned order was cancelled. That proves bounded authority and reconciliation, not profitable execution.
Is WRITE REFUSED a failure?SAFETY
No. Refusal is the correct behavior when evidence does not justify a write. A blind compensating transaction can turn one confusing incident into two.
What business outcome is proven?CLAIM DISCIPLINE
Operational containment is demonstrated on Shannon testnet. MTTR improvement, ROI, incident prevalence and production reliability are not yet proven and are not claimed.
AUDIT TRAIL
Go as deep as you want.
RAW SOURCESubmission package
The human-final-gate submission copy and truth boundaries.
Open on GitHub ↗ RAW SOURCERequirements → evidenceThe explicit MUST / MUST_NOT coverage ledger.
Open on GitHub ↗ FILM CONTRACT2:35 demo scriptThe canonical judge story for the final encoded film.
Open source ↗ LIVEIndependent Shannon witnessesRead-only chain, receipt, contract-code and collateral-unit verification from the Proof Room.
Open live witnesses →