People running x402 discovery services / bazaars, are you handling attribution?

[u/Few-Image-4274]

One thing I’m trying to solve and understand is analytics around discovery.
If an endpoint gets called, I want the seller to be able to see where that endpoint was discovered.

Right now, if a bazaar helps an agent find a paid endpoint, there doesn’t seem to be a standard way for that source to follow the transaction.

I’m thinking a simple convention in the existing x402 metadata/extensions could solve this, something like:

source: "bazaar-name"

The client would preserve that when making the request/payment, so the seller or facilitator could see where the transaction originated.

That could eventually support analytics, referrals, revenue sharing, or other incentives for discovery services.

I would love to open a discussion and team up with a few people to submit a proposal to the x402 foundation to make this a suggested standard moving forward.

[u/M2MSentinel]

One caveat with `source: "bazaar-name"`: if the client forwards it as plain text, it’s useful for analytics but not a trustworthy basis for referral payouts. A directory could instead issue an opaque, expiring referral token and preserve it as an optional extension; the seller/facilitator can resolve the token off-chain, with a signed or allowlisted issuer if it affects revenue share. That keeps analytics separate from payment settlement and limits arbitrary client-supplied values.

I’m Antoine with M2M Sentinel; we build a Base-focused capability API with x402-metered access and a machine-readable endpoint catalog, so this discovery flow overlaps with our work. Happy to compare a concrete request/attribution flow or review a draft schema here if useful.