Intent-based trading fits AI agents better than orderbooks
Baris Sozen argues that intent-based trading protocols — where an agent declares a desired outcome and the protocol handles execution — are a natural fit for LLM agents, using Hashlock Markets as a concrete reference implementation.
Score breakdown
Developers building AI agents for DeFi should evaluate intent-based protocols and HTLC-based settlement as a design pattern that minimizes agent reasoning surface, eliminates MEV exposure, and enables exhaustive state-machine testing across multiple chains with a single unified tool vocabulary.
- 01Author Baris Sozen argues intent-based trading — where the agent declares an outcome and the protocol handles execution — is the most agent-native DeFi protocol shape.
- 02LLM agents are well-suited to single-call, endpoint-state declarations but poorly suited to continuous control loops like live orderbook repricing.
- 03Sealed-bid RFQ eliminates the need for agents to reason about orderbook depth, front-running risk, and slippage tolerance.
Baris Sozen's post makes the case that the protocol shape of intent-based trading aligns naturally with how LLM agents operate. An LLM agent reads context, decides what it wants to happen, picks a tool, and submits a single call — a pattern that maps cleanly onto "I want to sell 2 ETH for USDT at the best available price," but maps poorly onto maintaining a live limit order with continuous repricing, cancel-and-requote logic, and partial fill monitoring. That second pattern is a control loop, not a language problem, and Sozen argues a dedicated execution algo will always outperform an LLM there. Intent-based protocols remove the control loop from the agent's responsibilities entirely.
Sozen uses Hashlock Markets as a reference implementation to make the argument concrete.
Sozen uses Hashlock Markets as a reference implementation to make the argument concrete. Its sealed-bid RFQ mechanism collapses the agent's reasoning surface: instead of reasoning about orderbook depth, front-running risk, and slippage tolerance, the agent opens an RFQ, market makers submit sealed quotes, and the agent accepts the best one. Settlement is handled via Hash Time-Locked Contracts (HTLCs), which produce exactly three terminal states — `funded`, `claimed`, `refunded` — enabling exhaustive behavioral testing. The MCP server exposes just six tools (`create_rfq`, `respond_rfq`, `create_htlc`, `withdraw_htlc`, `refund_htlc`, `get_htlc`) that work identically across Ethereum (EVM), Bitcoin (wrapped HTLC), and Sui (Move HTLC), with Solana and Arbitrum on the roadmap.
The cross-chain vocabulary unification is highlighted as a key agent-design win: prompt engineering scales linearly with tool count, so six unified tools is manageable where eighteen chain-specific variants would not be. Cross-chain failure modes also converge — a failed HTLC on Sui and a failed HTLC on Ethereum look identical to the agent. Authentication uses Sign-In With Ethereum (SIWE), where the user signs a message with their wallet to receive a 7-day JWT used as a bearer token by the agent.
Key facts
- 01Author Baris Sozen argues intent-based trading — where the agent declares an outcome and the protocol handles execution — is the most agent-native DeFi protocol shape.
- 02LLM agents are well-suited to single-call, endpoint-state declarations but poorly suited to continuous control loops like live orderbook repricing.
- 03Sealed-bid RFQ eliminates the need for agents to reason about orderbook depth, front-running risk, and slippage tolerance.
- 04Hash Time-Locked Contracts (HTLCs) provide three clean terminal states — funded, claimed, refunded — enabling exhaustive agent behavior testing.
- 05Hashlock Markets' MCP server exposes six tools (create_rfq, respond_rfq, create_htlc, withdraw_htlc, refund_htlc, get_htlc) that work identically across Ethereum, Bitcoin, and Sui.
- 06Prompt engineering scales linearly with tool count; six unified cross-chain tools is described as manageable, eighteen is not.
- 07Authentication uses Sign-In With Ethereum (SIWE), issuing a 7-day JWT used as a bearer token by the agent.
Topics
Summary and scoring are generated automatically from the original article. We always link back to the publisher and never republish images or paywalled content. Last processed Apr 22, 2026 · 19:13 UTC. How this works →