Intent-Driven Liquidity Strategies

In on‑chain markets, capital suppliers act as makers, underwriting market making, loans, and other settlement services. Traditional DeFi protocols hard‑wire these makers into single‑purpose pools whose pricing curves, risk parameters, and settlement venues are fused together. In most on-chain markets, liquidity providers behave like passive depositors. Because the pool - not the capital owner - controls every decision, funds have virtually no agency: they cannot choose where to trade, when to migrate, or how to react to market signals. Upgrades require hand-carried migrations, cross-chain extensions introduce new latency and security assumptions, and any attempt to refine pricing either balloons the codebase (expanding the attack surface) or, if left untouched, consigns capital to chronically mis-priced and under-utilized positions.

An intent‑driven architecture replaces pool‑specific deposits with liquidity positions, standing declarations that define how a provider’s assets may be utilized. Each intent encodes durable invariants (acceptable collateral, minimum yield, tenor limits, diversification quotas) while leaving execution to an open solver market. Consider a lending policy that says: “Earn ≥ 5 % fixed on whitelisted RWAs or blue‑chip collateral for 90 days, and redeploy idle cash cross‑chain when spread > 100 bps." Every allocation, draw‑down or rollover must satisfy these predicates, and solvers compete to source the borrower, chain, and settlement proof that delivers the best net yield within the stated risk parameters.

Khalani realizes long‑lived liquidity intents with automatons, stateful on‑chain agents that track utilization and risk metrics, publish intents when thresholds trigger, and verify solutions before accepting state transitions. When utilization drops, for example, the automaton publishes a one-step rebalancing intent; solvers bid to execute the trade and must provide on-chain verifiable evidence that the post‑transaction state still respects every invariant. The automaton therefore functions as a programmatic portfolio manager whose execution layer is outsourced to whichever solver can prove best execution at that time.

This division of labor produces three systemic advantages:

• Composable capital. Assets are no longer trapped in protocol‑specific pools; they respond to market signals and migrate to the venue offering the best risk‑adjusted return.

• Continuous optimization. Because solver fees are paid only when an invariant‑honoring settlement transaction is accepted, any inefficiency becomes a bidding opportunity for competitors.

• Reduced governance overhead. Strategy updates live in the automaton’s predicate logic, eliminating disruptive “v2” liquidity migrations and simplifying cross‑chain deployment.

Intent‑driven liquidity transforms passive capital blobs into programmable market stances. Capital providers articulate policy; solver markets handle execution; On-chain verifiable settlement guarantees that every state transition respects the declared risk constraints.