Skip to main content
Independent MeasurementEndpoint record (L0 · L1)Published state: passLast probed: 2026-09-29 · today

apiacre.com/v1/web/robots-sitemap

1.Catalog declaration

Catalog declaration for this endpoint
Resource URLhttps://apiacre.com/v1/web/robots-sitemap
Sourcecdp_bazaar
Declared methodPOST
Networkeip155:8453
Receiving address0xa0bfa4f07281c9b248dc3aed2217836bca24869b
Declared price (base units)25000
Catalog statusactive
First seen / last seen2026-08-14 08:39 UTC / 2026-09-29 01:03 UTC
Catalog-reported calls / payers (30d)1 / 1

2.Probe history

2026-09-092026-09-29
Figure 1. Probe timeline, last 30 probes for this endpoint (UTC). Filled = pass, crossed = fail, dashed = unverified. Same-day probes overlap. Marks closer than one mark width are stepped down one lane.
L0 probe history, newest first
Probed atMethodVerdictHTTPLatencyReason
2026-09-29 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402135 ms—
2026-09-28 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402468 ms—
2026-09-27 16:40 UTCPOSTpass402154 ms—
2026-09-26 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402169 ms—
2026-09-26 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402375 ms—
2026-09-25 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402517 ms—
2026-09-24 16:40 UTCPOSTpass402117 ms—
2026-09-23 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402282 ms—
2026-09-23 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402266 ms—
2026-09-22 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402312 ms—
2026-09-21 16:40 UTCPOSTpass402130 ms—
2026-09-21 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402147 ms—
2026-09-20 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402306 ms—
2026-09-19 16:40 UTCPOSTpass402374 ms—
2026-09-18 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402410 ms—
2026-09-18 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402396 ms—
2026-09-17 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402150 ms—
2026-09-16 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402409 ms—
2026-09-15 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402205 ms—
2026-09-15 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402395 ms—
2026-09-14 16:40 UTCPOSTpass402274 ms—
2026-09-14 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402158 ms—
2026-09-13 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402324 ms—
2026-09-12 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402252 ms—
2026-09-12 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402159 ms—
2026-09-11 16:40 UTCPOSTpass402154 ms—
2026-09-11 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402535 ms—
2026-09-10 14:40 UTCPOSTpass402355 ms—
2026-09-09 23:40 UTCPOSTpass402405 ms—
2026-09-09 14:40 UTCPOSTpass402486 ms—

3.L1 — real purchases

0 of 1 paid attempts settled with a receipt, and 0 of those also returned a 2xx response (delivered). Each settled row carries its on-chain transaction hash — the receipt is the evidence. A settled row reads as nonce-bound when the on-chain re-read also matched the one-time signature nonce we generated for that purchase, and amount + payee when it matched amount, payee, asset and chain with no nonce on record — the binding shipped on 2026-09-04, so earlier rows carry the weaker evidence and keep their label rather than being demoted (methodology). settled is the transfer we confirmed on-chain; delivered is the response arriving. A settled row whose paid request answered 5xx counts as settled and not as delivered — definitions.

1 of those paid attempts are held as inconclusive rather than counted against this seller (0 settled and answered 4xx, 1 answered 4xx with no settlement receipt, 0 answered 402 or 5xx while our own payer wallet was out of USDC, 2026-09-13 00:00 to 2026-09-15 23:49 UTC). A 4xx says the request was not one the server would accept, and we cannot rule out that the request was ours to get wrong: vet402 buys with no API key of the seller's, and sends a POST body only when the seller declares one. This is the same principle the methodology already applied to path_template URLs, applied to the body and the authentication header as well. The rows are not deleted and not hidden — they are below, with their status and HTTP code, and they are out of the denominator for delivered (corrections).

1 of the paid attempts failed on vet402's side (for example our wallet was out of USDC, or we did not send the input the listing declares). The rows stay in the table.

Terms in this table

settle_failed
vet402 signed a payment and got no settlement receipt back.
unsettled_4xx
held_reason in the export: the paid request got a 4xx with no settlement receipt and no transaction.
L2 not_checked
not checked: the paid request did not answer 200, so there was no response to check against the listing's output schema.
Whose side
the same words as the seller page: seller's side only after failures on two different days (UTC), marked “under re-check”; vet402's side; or not sorted (the rules).
0/1
Figure 2. Settle-through: one cell per paid attempt. Filled = settled with an on-chain receipt, crossed = signed, and not settled on-chain.
L1 purchase history, newest first
Attempted atResultHTTPReceipt (tx)Latency
09-05 12:07settle_failed422—772 ms
25000 units (≈ $0.03 USDC) · L2 not_checkedWhose side: vet402's side

Get one email when this record's verdict changes. No digest, no marketing — one message per change, and only for this endpoint. We first send one confirmation email; nothing else goes out until you confirm.

4.Catalog listing events

No listing changes observed.

unverified is not a failure; a fail is published only after two consecutive failing probes. Definitions: methodology.

5.Dispute this record

Think a measurement above is wrong? Say which probe or purchase and what you observed instead. One person reads it and replies. The record is never deleted on dispute: if it was wrong, the correction is published with the same weight; if it was right, it stands. Operators who control the receiving address can also sign a dispute via POST /api/v1/observatory/disputes (API reference), which re-measures through the normal publication gate.

About the purchase at 2026-09-05T12:07:45Z (UTC). The form starts with that time; add what you saw instead.

20–2,000 characters · 59 so far