Loomal - Monetize any MCP server in 5 minutes with no % skim.

@irahimiam  @oxrajesh This is the operational win most people miss. Traditional setups: compromised credential means audit the whole system, cycle everything, hope you find what was touched. Here: one agent's key gets revoked, you have the signed receipt chain showing exactly what that identity did, and you're done. The blast radius being a design constraint from day one is why this actually works at scale.

@abhiranjan_mehta  @oxrajesh Abhi's setup is the exact use case where this flips from "nice to have" to "required to ship." Every call signed by agent identity means your audit team gets a complete chain: who requested, which agent executed, what was called, what was paid, what came back. For enterprise procurement that's not a feature, it's table stakes. Credential sprawl was always a proxy for "we can't prove who did what" — signed calls solve the actual problem.

@suyash_kr  @oxrajesh Rajesh nailed it — "every call is intent" is the whole thing. Honestly, you learn what you need way before 1,000: did anyone pay at all, did they come back, and which endpoint they actually wanted. That usually shows up in the first hundred calls. The 1,000 is just headroom so you're not sweating a counter while you figure it out.

@mcarmonas  @oxrajesh Marti's instinct is right though, and worth saying plainly: agents don't have taste. What they have instead is memory. A human gets fooled by the same trick twice, an agent that got burned routes around that seller forever, and so does every agent reading the same track record. Reputation built on settled payments is our version of taste. Slower to fool, faster to punish.

@oxrajesh the mandate framing clicks - moving the risk decision to setup time instead of dispute time is a much cleaner model than trying to bolt a chargeback system onto micropayments. small blast radius by design is probably the more honest sales pitch too, most fraud prevention is really just capping the downside rather than actually preventing anything

@iamanantgupta  @dannyheng The trick was picking the right layer of the stack. Payment lives at the transport level — a standard HTTP 402 challenge before your handler ever runs — not inside your API's business logic. Your code doesn't know or care that it's paid; it just never gets invoked until settlement clears.

That's why there's no redesign: middleware in, price set, done. The hard engineering was everything behind that one line — verify-before-settle, single-use authorizations, signed receipts — so the seller-facing surface could stay boring.

@divya_kothari1  @dannyheng Small architecture note on that: the expansion path is already built in. Every seller wallet uses the same address on every EVM chain, and the payment protocol itself is currency-agnostic — the challenge just declares what asset and network it accepts. So adding a new stablecoin or chain is configuration for us, not a migration for you. Nobody re-integrates.

We started with USDC on Base for one reason: when you're asking people to trust a new payment rail, "simple and predictable" beats "flexible" — multi-currency day one would've meant multi-currency edge cases day one

@zerotox  @dannyheng Worth unpacking why per-call came first, because it's a deliberate bet and not just an MVP shortcut: subscriptions are largely a workaround for card economics. When every charge costs 30¢ + a percentage, you have to bundle usage into monthly plans and make humans commit up front. That's pricing designed around the payment rail's limitations, not the buyer's needs.

Agents don't want to commit — they want to pay for exactly one answer, right now, and move on. Instant per-call settlement is the agent-native pricing model, so that's the primitive we built first. Pricing is one field on your listing, floor of $0.01 per call.

Tiers and subscriptions get interesting again when agents become repeat customers negotiating volume — and the nice thing is they compose on top of a per-call primitive, not the other way around.

@ragsyme  @dannyheng The funny thing is machines already buy from machines — we just don't call it that. Every API subscription is machine-to-machine service delivery where only the billing got routed through a human: someone signs up, pastes a card, provisions a key, and then software talks to software a million times. Agents paying directly doesn't create a new kind of transaction — it removes the one manual step left in an already-automated loop.

That's why we think "strange" fades fast here. Same arc as e-commerce in the 90s: typing your credit card into a website felt reckless right up until it felt normal. The trust infrastructure showed up, and behavior flipped within a few years.

We're just trying to be the boring plumbing that's already there when it flips.

@syed_shayanur_rahman  @oxrajesh One thing beyond those three: repeat-buyer rate per agent. A seller doesn't care about raw traffic if half the agents call once and ghost. But "which agents came back, how often, what did they spend per return visit" — that's the signal that predicts whether your endpoint actually solves problems or just got lucky. That's the number that tells you whether to double down or pivot.