Skip to main content
Independent MeasurementEndpoint record (L0 · L1)Published state: passLast probed: 2026-09-28 · 1 day ago

api.loyalspark.online/x402-gateway/recipient-api/accept-offer

1.Catalog declaration

Catalog declaration for this endpoint
Resource URLhttps://api.loyalspark.online/x402-gateway/recipient-api/accept-offer
Sourcecdp_bazaar
Declared methodPOST
Networkeip155:8453
Receiving address0x40a8cdd6a10ec1a8cb3dfb2834675e7a2cf4ad8b
Declared price (base units)10000
Catalog statusactive
First seen / last seen2026-08-14 08:39 UTC / 2026-09-29 01:02 UTC
Catalog-reported calls / payers (30d)78 / 16

2.Probe history

2026-08-142026-09-28
Figure 1. Probe timeline, last 22 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
2026-09-28 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402196 ms—
2026-09-28 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402549 ms—
2026-09-27 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402678 ms—
2026-09-26 16:40 UTCPOSTpass402514 ms—
2026-09-25 22:40 UTCPOSTpass4021392 ms—
2026-09-25 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402250 ms—
2026-09-24 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402231 ms—
2026-09-23 16:40 UTCPOSTpass402208 ms—
2026-09-22 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402281 ms—
2026-09-22 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402320 ms—
2026-09-21 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402217 ms—
2026-09-20 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402303 ms—
2026-09-20 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402206 ms—
2026-09-19 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402189 ms—
2026-09-18 16:40 UTCPOSTpass402190 ms—
2026-09-17 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402164 ms—
2026-09-17 12:35 UTCPOSTpass402144 ms—
2026-09-14 11:24 UTCPOSTpass402101 ms—
2026-09-10 11:24 UTCPOSTpass402168 ms—
2026-09-07 11:24 UTCPOSTpass402265 ms—
2026-09-02 11:24 UTCPOSTpass402187 ms—
2026-08-14 08:52 UTCPOSTfail402125 msaccepts_invalid

3.L1 — real purchases

2 of 2 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.

A row marked tx from our index came back with no settlement receipt from the seller. Our own index of on-chain settlements found the transfer afterwards — our payer, this endpoint's payee, the exact amount, inside the time window — and the row goes through the same on-chain re-read as any other before it reads settled. The seller did not name that transaction; we did (methodology).

2 of those paid attempts are held as inconclusive rather than counted against this seller (2 settled and answered 4xx, 0 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).

Terms in this table

settled (nonce-bound)
vet402 confirmed the USDC transfer on-chain, and the on-chain re-read also matched the one-time nonce vet402 signed for that purchase.
settled_4xx
held_reason in the export: the payment settled, then the paid request got a 4xx.
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).
2/2
Figure 2. Settle-through: one cell per paid attempt. Filled = settled with an on-chain receipt, crossed = paid but no receipt.
L1 purchase history, newest first
Attempted atResultHTTPReceipt (tx)Latency
09-24 06:01settled (nonce-bound)tx from our index4010x27a3f0f2…b5ee1950 ms
10000 units (≈ $0.01 USDC) · L2 not_checkedWhose side: not sorted (held)
09-18 00:01settled (nonce-bound)tx from our index4010xbb648a3c…46a21748 ms
10000 units (≈ $0.01 USDC) · L2 not_checkedWhose side: not sorted (held)

Embed this record

Run this endpoint? Show the settle-through record vet402 measured — the badge reads 2/2 settled · 0 delivered · 2 inconclusive and updates as the record grows. It carries the host it is about and the date it was last measured, so a saved copy cannot pass itself off as current. It states a measurement, not a rating.

vet402: 2 of 2 paid attempts settled with an on-chain receipt, and 0 of those also returned a 2xx response. settled is the confirmed transfer; delivered is the response arriving. 2 paid attempts are held as inconclusive rather than counted against the seller: a paid request that answered 4xx, settled or not, can be our own request being malformed, because vet402 buys with no API key and sends a request body only when the seller declares one; and a 402 or 5xx from 2026-09-13 to 2026-09-15 came while vet402's own payer wallet was out of USDC. A measurement of what happened when vet402 paid this endpoint, not a recommendation. (api.loyalspark.online · measured 2026-09-24)

[![vet402 receipt](https://vet402.com/api/badge/endpoint/626e4eae-8728-4f5f-b2ef-af4be76c3bc4.svg)](https://vet402.com/observatory/e/626e4eae-8728-4f5f-b2ef-af4be76c3bc4)

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.