1) What this is, in one paragraph

Agroasys (Agri Operations and Systems) is a B2B marketplace that coordinates agricultural commodity trade, matching suppliers/aggregators with buyers and handling the operational rails: logistics coordination, quality checks, documents, and trade execution. We have built the “Web2 coordination layer,” but settlement is still stuck in bank rails (SWIFT, LCs, manual compliance), creating a major trust and speed bottleneck.

We are requesting 390,000 USDC to build the Agroasys Web3 Layer on Polkadot Asset Hub: a non-custodial settlement engine that uses escrow + Ricardian contracts and settles in native USDC, enabling delivery-versus-payment style trade execution, without forcing enterprises or individuals to become crypto experts. USDC is natively issued on Asset Hub , and we aim to be early practical testers of PolkaVM (RISC-V) for complex trade logic that is costly/rigid on traditional EVM stacks.

---

2) Who We Are (What we do today)

Agroasys today (Web2)

We are an operational B2B trade coordination marketplace in the agri-commodity sector. In practical terms, we:

• Source and coordinate commodity trades (e.g., Coffee, Cashew, Sesame and similar categories)
• Manage the workflows buyers and suppliers need to execute trade:
  • Document flows (contracts, inspection reports, shipping documents)
  • Counterparty coordination (who ships when, what quality, what penalties apply)
  • Logistics & inspection coordination (with third parties)
• Work with real buyers/suppliers and real constraints: compliance, shipping timelines, quality variability, and dispute risk.

What we’ve built so far

• The market/operations layer: verified parties, trade coordination workflows, and the execution muscle needed to move physical goods.

---

3) The Context: A very large market that still uses traditional payment rails

The Global agricultural value chains represent massive annual revenue opportunity, for example, the African Development Bank’s strategy highlights annual revenue opportunities around ~US$85B in selected value chains by 2025 (often rounded to the low/mid-$80B range).

Yet the sector still runs on a fragile split between:

• Information rail: PDFs, emails, scanned documents, phone calls
• Money rail: banks, SWIFT, and documentary instruments (LCs)

---

4) The Problem (The “Synchronization Gap”)

International commodity trade suffers from a structural mismatch:

A) Delivery vs Payment trust gap

• Sellers hesitate to ship without certainty of payment.
• Buyers hesitate to pay without certainty of shipment/quality.

The industry often resolves this with Letters of Credit (LCs) and bank intermediation, effective but expensive and slow. LC issuance and related costs are typically percentage-based and can range roughly around ~0.75%–5%+ depending on structure/country risk, with additional costs for confirmed LCs and amendments.

B) Settlement latency and operational drag

• Even when everyone agrees, settlement can take days (and sometimes longer with compliance checks).
• The result: slower trade velocity, higher working capital needs, more disputes, and more reliance on intermediaries.

C) Real trade logic is nuanced (and costly on rigid stacks)

Commodity trades aren’t “send money, done.” They include:

• Quality thresholds and penalty logic (e.g., moisture %, grade, defect count)
• Partial releases (e.g., release 80% on shipment, hold 20% until final docs/quality)
• Documentary conditions (Bill of Lading, Inspection Certificate, packing list)
• Dispute pathways and jurisdiction constraints

This is exactly where a Ricardian Contract approach is powerful: a legally meaningful human-readable contract, cryptographically bound to on-chain execution.

---

5) Our Solution: The Agroasys Web3 Layer (Non-custodial settlement on Asset Hub)

We plan on building a Non-Custodial Settlement Engine that binds a real-world trade contract to on-chain escrow and executes releases based on verified trade events.

Core principles

1. Non-custodial: Agroasys never takes custody of user funds. Funds move wallet → escrow contract → wallet.
2. Contract-first: the legal trade agreement (PDF) is the source of truth; on-chain logic enforces agreed triggers.
3. Stable settlement: USDC-based settlement to avoid volatility as a business constraint. USDC is natively issued on Polkadot Asset Hub.

---

6) Why Polkadot (Why not “any chain”?)

A) Native USDC on Asset Hub (no bridge risk by design)

Circle confirms USDC is natively issued on Polkadot Asset Hub, and can move across Polkadot via XCM.
Polkadot’s own support docs list USDC on Asset Hub and even note identifiers such as USDC asset ID 1337 (useful for integration).

B) PolkaVM (RISC-V) for complex, conditional trade logic

PolkaVM is designed as a high-performance RISC-V VM intended to execute heavier logic efficiently, which matters when you encode real commercial conditions.

Our intent: be among the early practical builders using PolkaVM for real RWA settlement logic, publish performance learnings, and provide a reference architecture the ecosystem can reuse.

---

7) System Design (How it works end-to-end)

Step 1 — Trade agreement (Ricardian contract binding)

• Buyer and Seller sign a standard commercial PDF contract off-chain.
• We compute a cryptographic hash of that PDF (TradeHash / TradeID).
• The TradeHash is recorded on-chain as the immutable anchor linking legal text ↔ execution.

Step 2 — Buyer locks USDC in a smart escrow (non-custodial)

• Buyer deposits USDC into an escrow contract deployed on Asset Hub.
• Agroasys does not hold funds; the contract does.

Step 3 — Oracle-verified trade events (documents + milestones)

• A “Logistics Oracle” posts verifiable trade status events such as:
  • Contract Signed
  • Shipped (BoL issued)
  • Inspection Passed / Grade Confirmed
  • Delivered
• The oracle is a structured attestation layer connected to documentary evidence (BoL, inspection certificate references, etc.).

Step 4 — PolkaVM executes conditional settlement

• When conditions match the Ricardian contract terms, escrow releases:
  • Full release, partial release, penalty deductions, or holds—exactly as agreed.

Step 5 — Instant settlement in USDC

• Once triggered, settlement executes on-chain and becomes final quickly compared to traditional rails.

---

8) Onboarding Strategy (How we bring real enterprises + individuals on-chain)

A common adoption gap in emerging markets is expecting end users to change behavior and tooling before they see value. Our approach is to abstract complexity so users get faster settlement without needing to become crypto-native.

Our onboarding approach: abstraction + familiarity

• Social login / enterprise login (e.g., Google Workspace) via wallet abstraction
• Users see:
  • USD amounts
  • Clear trade status (“Funds locked”, “Shipped verified”, “Released”)
  • A simple approve flow
• Under the hood:
  • A non-custodial wallet is generated/managed for the user (user-controlled)
  • They fund settlement via the most practical rails available (stablecoin transfer / structured payment flow depending on counterparty reality)

Goal: the settlement layer is “invisible” operationally, users feel faster, safer settlement.

---

9) Milestones & Budget (Total: 390,000 USDC)

To match the full scope of the architecture (on-chain settlement, oracle, indexing, APIs, dashboard, auth, storage, reconciliation, accounting flows, monitoring, and production readiness), we will deliver this work in two phases, each submitted as a separate proposal:

• Phase 1 covers Milestones 0–2 (foundation + core protocol + orchestration services).
• Phase 2 covers Milestones 3–5 (indexing/reconciliation/infra + full product integration + security hardening).

Note: KYC/KYB/KYT/AML internal engines are excluded (handled by third-party providers). We only build the integration hooks and operational workflows needed for the settlement layer to function safely.

---

Phase 1 Proposal — Milestones 0–2 (Foundation + Core Settlement + Orchestration)

Milestone 0 — System Spec, Threat Model, and Execution Plan (Weeks 1–2) — 18,000 USDC

Goal: Lock scope, interfaces, and security boundaries to prevent rebuilds and ensure correctness of the settlement lifecycle.

Milestone 1 — Asset Hub Settlement Core (Escrow + Fees + Treasury Routing) (Weeks 3–8) — 92,000 USDC

Goal: Build the on-chain settlement engine on Asset Hub (USDC escrow, conditional release, and fee routing), with deterministic builds and rigorous testing.

Acceptance Criteria: End-to-end testnet flow: create trade → deposit USDC → oracle confirm → supplier payout + treasury payout; plus cancel/timeout/disputeHold paths verified.

Milestone 2 — Platform Orchestration Services (API + Ricardian + Oracle + Notifications + Auth/DB) (Weeks 9–14) — 98,000 USDC

Goal: Build the off-chain services that make the protocol usable: contract hashing, storage, oracle relay, APIs, notifications, and user/org auth.

Acceptance Criteria: Trade created via API results in: TradeHash stored + on-chain trade created + indexed state available + oracle update triggers correct contract transition.

Phase 2 Proposal — Milestones 3–5 (Indexing/Infra + Product Integration + Security Hardening)

Milestone 3 — Data Sync, Indexing, Reconciliation, Error Handling, and Infra (Weeks 15–22) — 78,000 USDC

Goal: Make the system reliable: indexing, GraphQL/API, reconciliation, error handling, monitoring, and CI/CD.

Acceptance Criteria: On-chain events reflected in API within a defined SLA; reconciliation detects mismatches; monitoring alerts on forced failures.

Milestone 4 — Frontend + Web3Auth + Fiat Ramp + Operational Pilot (Weeks 23–32) — 54,000 USDC

Goal: Ship the complete user flow: login, create trade, deposit, track milestones, settle; then run a real pilot transaction.

Acceptance Criteria: Non-crypto user can: login → create trade → fund → observe oracle updates → settlement completes; pilot evidenced by tx hashes and report.

Milestone 5 — Security Review, Hardening, and Production Readiness (Weeks 33–38) — 50,000 USDC

Goal: Reduce protocol risk before scaling volume: security review, abuse testing, and production readiness documentation.

Acceptance Criteria: Security findings addressed; readiness checklist completed; system can be operated continuously with monitoring and documented incident procedures.

Budget Summary

---

10) Realistic Risks & Mitigation

---

11) Impact on Polkadot ( On Why this might matter to the network)

A) Real commercial volume, not speculative token activity

This is infrastructure designed to bring repeating trade settlement activity to Asset Hub—fee-generating usage anchored in real-world demand.

B) A reference implementation for “RWA settlement with legal binding”

We will open-source the core modules where possible (escrow logic + Ricardian hashing patterns) so other builders (supply chain, real estate settlement, invoice financing) can reuse the standard.

C) A real PolkaVM stress-test with messy business logic

PolkaVM needs high-pressure real workloads to mature. We’ll publish learnings: performance, edge cases, and best practices.

---

12) What We Need From the Community

We are not only asking for capital, we want alignment and technical mentorship.

Requested community support

1. Standards alignment: Which RWA / trade settlement standards should we align to in Polkadot (data schemas, oracle patterns, audit conventions)?
2. Oracle architecture guidance: Best practice patterns for document-backed attestation flows (minimizing trust while remaining deployable).
3. PolkaVM early adopter guidance: Tooling, deterministic build best practices, and integration patterns the ecosystem wants tested.

---

13) Why we believe this is Polkadot-native

Agroasys is not a team searching for a blockchain use case. We are already executing trade coordination in the real world, and we are trying to solve a specific commercial pain:

• trust gap
• slow settlement
• high bank fees
• paper-heavy execution
• avoidable disputes

Polkadot Asset Hub gives us native USDC settlement and PolkaVM gives us a path to execute complex conditional trade logic efficiently.

If the ecosystem wants RWA to mean “real trade on-chain,” this is the shape of it: delivery-driven settlement with legal binding and non-custodial escrow.

---

Discussion is now open. Please we would love your reviews on this and thank you very much