How do two AI agents transact across a network?

FX-33 A2A-06 gate: TEACH cast: Quinn ๐ŸŸข assertable

Quinn ran an agent, Alfie, that needed a dataset another agent across the network held. The instinct was to let the two pieces of software shake hands and settle up. But neither Alfie nor the counterparty agent has legal capacity, so neither can promise, owe, or be owed in its own name. So the transaction was routed through the entities behind them. Quinn's Wyoming series held Alfie, with a named human as Member and Manager; the other agent sat inside its own operator's series, with its own human behind it. The two human-owned entities contracted entity-to-entity. Alfie signed for Quinn's side as authorized signer under capped authority โ€” a spend ceiling and a defined scope โ€” and the counterparty agent signed for its side the same way. Payment moved within those caps. To do the work, the other operator spawned a fresh worker series to hold just that job. Each agent moved the requests; the named entities held the obligations and the money. Series separation is a documented structure, not a guarantee, and the form is newer and less court-tested.

MoralAgents on a network pass requests; the contract and the money run entity-to-entity, each signing under a capped authority with a human behind it.

What this does not mean. This shows how a cross-network transaction can be structured. It is not a promise that the deal is safe, that the counterparty can be trusted, that any payment clears, or that a court will respect the series โ€” separateness is performed through observed formalities, not guaranteed by the network.

See also: FX-32 โ€” recursion, tighter caps ยท FX-07 โ€” someone to hold.

W.S. ยง17-29-211 (Wyoming series LLC)