I built the first implementation of ERC-8226, an on-chain mandate that constrains AI agents managing tokenized stocks

Post original

the thing id stress test first is that your concentration caps are enforced at trade time but a portfolio drifts on price, not just on trades. "max 30% per name" is really "max 30% at the moment of a permitted trade", tsla rips and its passively 45% of the book without a single trade ever touching the mandate. so the invariant reads stronger than it actually holds and that bites in a nasty way depending on how the post trade check is written. if you just assert resulting position 30, so the mandate locks the agent out of the exact de risking trade you want during a drawdown. you probably need to special case anything that moves an already breached position toward compliance, allow it even if it doesnt fully clear the cap on the cluster id question, id keep it static rather than going oracle based, but be deliberate about why. correlation isnt stable, it spikes in a crash which is exactly when the cap matters, so an oracle would be "more accurate" on paper. but the whole pitch is examiner ready and deterministic, and an oracle hands you a manipulation surface plus a liveness dependency where a stale or down feed either blocks trading or quietly moves your risk limits. for a regulated mandate id rather the cluster definition be a governed versioned param with change control events, which is the thing the sec language you quoted is actually asking for, than a number that can shift under you mid position