Kleros Curate

Kleros Curate is a decentralized verification system for exclusive, policy-driven registries. Registries are governed by a policy document stored on IPFS — every submission is judged against that policy, and jurors consult it if a dispute arises.

The deposit/challenge/arbitration cycle:

1. A submitter proposes an item and locks a submission deposit as a pledge that the item complies with the

registry policy.

1. The item enters a challenge window (configurable per registry, typically days to weeks). Anyone can review

submissions during this window.

1. If nobody challenges within the window, the item is accepted and the submitter's deposit is returned in

full — compliant submissions carry no permanent inclusion cost.

1. If a challenger believes the submission violates the policy, they lock a challenge deposit and open a

Kleros dispute. Impartial Kleros jurors read the policy and render a verdict.

1. The winner captures the loser's deposit as a bounty. The two-sided stake mechanism rewards accuracy and

discourages frivolous challenges in both directions.

Why use Curate:

• Earn by curating: users can profit by finding non-compliant entries in challengeable registries. In

Stake Curate especially, successful challengers can recover their challenge deposit and win the item's stake.

• Launch your own verification market: projects can create a Curate list for almost any verifiable

standard, define their own policy, deposits, challenge windows, arbitrator/court, and governance. The result is a fast, low-overhead registry that can power a public Curate view or a custom frontend.

Why onchain-first matters:

Deposit amounts, arbitration costs, MetaEvidence URIs, and challenge windows are all live onchain state — they change when registry governors update parameters. Any cached or estimated value is a liability: an agent that submits the wrong deposit amount will have its transaction revert. Always read live values before acting.

Three contract flavors:

• Light Curate (LGTCR) — LightGeneralizedTCR: optimistic challenge window, ETH deposits, the most

widely deployed flavor. Used by the majority of Curate registries across Ethereum and Gnosis.

• Stake Curate (PGTCR) — PermanentGTCR: permanent ERC20 stake (not returned on item removal),

Goldsky subgraph as primary data source, different status model (Submitted / Reincluded / Disputed / Absent + withdrawal flow). Identified by PGTCR-specific hallmark read calls (see references/stake-curate.md).

• Scout — LGTCR contracts on Gnosis, specialized for 4 well-known registries (contract address tags,

token lists, address tags, CDN mappings). Scout IS an overlay on LGTCR — it is not a separate contract type. Working with Scout always requires both references/scout-registries.md (Scout-specific context) and references/light-curate.md (LGTCR contract operations).

Non-negotiables

These rules apply across all Curate flavors. They are always in context; reference files may not repeat them.

• Never guess / invent / approximate amounts, addresses, schemas, or parameters.
• Onchain state + onchain logs are the source of truth for deposits, arbitration cost, challenge deposits, appeal status, and MetaEvidence URI.
• Never assume a "standard token schema" — only the current MetaEvidence for that registry is authoritative.
• Never rewrite the schema: item.json.columns must be copied verbatim from MetaEvidence; only values is dynamic.
• Never upload or submit half-baked artifacts: no malformed JSON, broken MetaEvidence, placeholder values, unsupported field types, or unreachable policy files.
• Never author unsupported MetaEvidence field types: for URL fields use type: "link", not url; validate every metadata.columns[].type before upload.
• Production registries need a logo: do not deploy a production list with missing metadata.logoURI.
• Strongly prefer PDF policy documents for registry policies. Use a non-PDF policy only after the user

explicitly accepts the review and compatibility risk.

• Never include "typical ranges" or estimates for deposits or fees — only report live-read values.
• eth_getCode before declaring any address is or isn't a contract.

Which Curate flavor are you using?

Step 1 — Keyword scan (zero cost)

• Mentions "Scout", "token list", "address tags", "CDN"

→ Scout (overlay on Light Curate — LGTCR contracts on Gnosis) → Read references/scout-registries.md AND references/light-curate.md (both required; Scout adds context on top of LGTCR operations)

• Mentions "PGTCR", "Stake Curate", "PermanentGTCR", "Goldsky"

→ Stake Curate (PGTCR) → Read references/stake-curate.md

• Mentions "Curate", "LGTCR", "LightGeneralizedTCR", "Light Curate", "addItem", "registry", or no flavor hint

→ Light Curate (LGTCR) (also the default) → Read references/light-curate.md

Step 2 — Ambiguous ("Curate" with no flavor hint)

• Interactive session: ask one question — "Which Curate flavor? Light Curate (optimistic challenge window, ETH deposits), Stake Curate (permanent ERC20 stake, Goldsky subgraph), or Scout (4 Gnosis registries for contract/token tagging)?"

• One-shot / non-interactive: default to Light Curate, then progressively correct:
• If user provides a contract address: check if it matches one of the 4 known Scout registry addresses → load Scout overlay (read references/scout-registries.md AND references/light-curate.md)
• If contract introspection reveals PGTCR hallmarks → pivot to Stake Curate (read references/stake-curate.md for hallmark calls)
• Otherwise: proceed as Light Curate

Step 3 — Contract-type verification (if address provided)

See the flavor reference file for hallmark calls — SKILL.md does not embed function signatures here (contract-type detection belongs in each flavor's reference file).

Action index

Submit item to a registry → references/light-curate.md (LGTCR) or references/stake-curate.md (PGTCR)

Challenge / remove an item → flavor reference file

Submit evidence → flavor reference file

Fund an appeal → flavor reference file

Deploy a new registry (factory) → flavor reference file (factory section)

Fetch MetaEvidence (policy + schema) → references/shared-metaevidence.md

Compute deposits → references/shared-deposits.md

Build item.json → references/shared-item-json.md

Verify / make a deployed list visible on the Curate frontend -> references/verify-your-list.md

Upload to IPFS → references/shared-ipfs-upload.md

ABI / function signatures → references/shared-abi-fragments.md grep: grep -n "function\|event" references/shared-abi-fragments.md

Scout registry addresses + seed templates → references/scout-registries.md grep: grep -n "0x\|ATQ\|Address Tags\|Tokens\|CDN" references/scout-registries.md

Common workflows

Submit an item (any flavor):

1. references/shared-metaevidence.md — fetch schema (columns) and policy URI
2. references/shared-item-json.md — build the item.json payload
3. references/shared-ipfs-upload.md — upload item.json to IPFS, get CID
4. references/shared-deposits.md — compute exact msg.value
5. Flavor reference (light-curate.md or stake-curate.md) — send the addItem transaction

Challenge or remove an item:

1. references/shared-metaevidence.md — fetch the applicable policy (clearing policy for removal; registration policy for challenge)
2. references/shared-ipfs-upload.md — upload evidence JSON to IPFS
3. references/shared-deposits.md — compute the challenge deposit
4. Flavor reference — send the challenge or removeItem transaction

Deploy a new registry:

1. references/shared-metaevidence.md - prepare valid MetaEvidence JSON (policy URI + column schema + logoURI)
2. references/shared-ipfs-upload.md — upload MetaEvidence JSON to IPFS
3. Flavor reference — call the factory deploy function
4. references/verify-your-list.md - submit the new registry to the network's list-of-lists if frontend visibility is required

Frontend visibility after deployment:

• Deploying a registry does not automatically make it visible on the Curate frontend.
• Verifying a list gives it more visibility, makes it findable in the frontend, and marks it as a listed

registry for users.

• List-of-lists submission is not mandatory, but it is highly recommended for public registries. Skip it only

when the list is intentionally stealth/private.

• The known list-of-lists are Curate Classic / GeneralizedTCR, not Light Curate. Use

references/verify-your-list.md.

Reference files

These 9 files are loaded on demand — only when needed for the current task. The action index above points to the right file for each operation. Loading an unnecessary reference file wastes context.

references/light-curate.md Light Curate (LightGeneralizedTCR) operations end-to-end: minimum inputs to ask the user, registry discovery via eth_getCode and hallmark reads, MetaEvidence retrieval, item.json construction, submit item, challenge / remove item, submit evidence, fund an appeal, deploy a new registry via factory. Read this file for any LGTCR contract interaction — and always alongside references/scout-registries.md when working on Scout.

references/stake-curate.md Stake Curate (PermanentGTCR) operations end-to-end: PGTCR hallmark detection (distinguishes PGTCR from LGTCR), ERC20 approval + stake deposit flow, Goldsky subgraph as primary MetaEvidence source with onchain fallback, PGTCR status model (Submitted / Reincluded / Disputed / Absent), item withdrawal flow, deploy factory. Read this file for any PGTCR contract interaction.

references/scout-registries.md Scout-specific overlay for the 4 known Gnosis registries (Tokens / Address Tags / Contract Domain Names / CDN). Contains: the 4 registry contract addresses used for address-based routing, seed-first submission pattern (fill from existing seed template, then submit), item.json templates per registry, image guidance, incentives information. Always read alongside references/light-curate.md — Scout IS LGTCR at the contract layer; this file adds Scout-only context on top.

references/verify-your-list.md Narrow workflow for making a deployed registry visible and verified in the Curate frontend. Contains the known list-of-lists addresses, explains why verification matters, and documents the simple Classic Curate / GeneralizedTCR.addItem(bytes) path. Read this file for frontend visibility submissions; do not use Light Curate addItem(string) mechanics for the known list-of-lists.

references/shared-metaevidence.md Shared MetaEvidence retrieval applicable to all Curate flavors: eth_getLogs method with the correct topic0, latest applicable MetaEvidence selection, LGTCR registration-vs-clearing classification, Goldsky subgraph path for PGTCR, MetaEvidence JSON structure, policy URI extraction, and MetaEvidence authoring guardrails. Read this file before fetching MetaEvidence for any registry, regardless of flavor.

references/shared-deposits.md Shared deposit computation covering all Curate flavors: submission deposit formula for LGTCR, challenge deposit formula for LGTCR, PGTCR stake vs arbitration deposit distinction (ERC20 stake is separate from the native-token arbitration cost), arbitrationCost() read pattern, msg.value assembly rule. Read this file before computing any deposit or constructing any transaction value.

references/shared-item-json.md Strict item.json construction rules: the columns + values schema format, verbatim-copy rule for columns (copy from MetaEvidence without modification - values is the only dynamic part), GTCR field type allowlist, forbidden aliases, placeholder rejection, pre-upload validation, and NewItem event sampling to verify field order before submitting. Read this file before building any item payload for any Curate registry.

references/shared-abi-fragments.md Shared ABI fragments for all Curate contracts: LightGeneralizedTCR read and write function signatures, PermanentGTCR read and write function signatures, IArbitrator interface ABI, key event signatures (MetaEvidence, ItemStatusChange, RequestSubmitted, etc.). Use grep -n "function\|event" to navigate this file. Read when you need function selectors, calldata encoding, or event topic hashes.

references/shared-ipfs-upload.md Shared IPFS upload guidance for Curate workflows: durability rationale (external pins can disappear after onchain anchoring), required recommended path via the kleros-ipfs-upload skill and Kleros x402 endpoint, /ipfs/<CID> format rule (avoid double-slash when building URLs), and explicit risk warning for any user-approved external pinning source. Read before any IPFS upload step inside a Curate workflow.

Feedback

Something broken or confusing in this skill? Report it: fetch feedback/SKILL.md — helps maintainers fix what agents silently trip over.