paybondpaybond
Sign in

Use case

Disputes that don’t devolve into “trust me.”

When settlement outcomes are questioned, you need a shared record: what was agreed, what happened, what evidence exists, and who approved which step. Paybond records signed provenance so disputes can be reviewed and resolved without privileged database access.

Start now>Explore docsView walkthrough

Dispute handling built on provenance.

Keep the record canonical: intent, evidence, operator actions, and deterministic evaluation.

  • Evidence tied to the intent lifecycle

    Every artifact—agent outputs, tool calls, operator reviews—can be attached to the same canonical intent history.

  • Attributable operator actions

    Human intervention is supported, but never invisible: approvals and overrides are recorded as signed events.

  • Tamper-evident provenance

    Dispute review relies on append-only signed provenance rather than mutable dashboards or ad-hoc exports.

  • Tenant-safe dispute handling

    Evidence access stays scoped to authenticated tenant and operator identity throughout the workflow.

How disputes stay evidence-backed

A coherent packet from the same canonical history that powers operator workflows.

  1. Step 1

    Record lifecycle events

    As work progresses, the system appends signed events for intent, funding, execution checkpoints, and outcomes.

  2. Step 2

    Attach signed evidence

    Agents and operators attach evidence artifacts to the lifecycle so reviewers can reproduce the settlement decision.

  3. Step 3

    Run deterministic evaluation

    Predicate evaluation is reproducible; reviewers can see which criteria passed or failed over the evidence set.

  4. Step 4

    Open and manage disputes

    Disputes are modeled as explicit, attributable actions and decisions—captured in the same provenance graph.

  5. Step 5

    Export an evidence packet

    Generate a coherent export bundle from signed history for partners, auditors, or internal review.

Evidence that’s reviewable, not just available.

Disputes are resolved faster when the record is canonical. Paybond keeps evidence and operator actions attributable and tenant-scoped, so review doesn’t depend on informal screenshots.

Guarantees

  • Append-only signed provenance prevents silent rewrites.
  • Operator actions remain attributable with explicit identity.
  • Tenant scope is derived from authenticated credentials at every boundary.
Explore Ledger

Where it fits

Disputes appear anywhere automation meets real-world ambiguity.

  • Marketplaces & vendors

    Provide buyers and sellers with a shared evidence trail for acceptance and settlement disputes.

  • Enterprise approvals

    Keep human review in the loop while preserving a canonical, attributable record for auditors.

  • Partner verification

    Share receipts and evidence packets without granting privileged database access.

Disputes & evidence FAQ

Questions about evidence capture and review.

Do disputes require manual review?

Not always. Many disputes are prevented by deterministic predicates. When human review is needed, the review is recorded as attributable events so outcomes remain auditable.

What kinds of evidence are supported?

Any signed artifact your workflow produces: structured result envelopes, tool outputs, policy decisions, operator reviews, and dispute materials—attached to the intent lifecycle.

How do exports stay consistent with what operators saw?

Exports are derived from the same canonical append-only provenance history that powers the operator surfaces—so the packet matches the record.

How does tenant isolation work for evidence access?

Evidence access is scoped to tenant and operator identity derived from authenticated credentials. Cross-tenant access is treated as a severity-zero incident and defended throughout the system.