Jarvis+
Jarvis+ — a reference card for a crypto project: what the product does and how verifiable the project’s key claims are; also — alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis (DecAI Fit).
Jarvis+ — an AI/Agents project (AI assistant for communities/chats; NLP/knowledge graph intent) with a token on the Ethereum network (per onchain facts).
Disclaimer
Important: this page is a reference overview of the project. Within DecAIHub, we separately record a verification based on open sources within the AI thesis (what is real AI/onchain/why a token, and which sources this is based on).
This is not financial advice and not a recommendation to buy/sell/hold any asset. We do not assess price, returns, or entry/exit timing.
Conclusions are based on publicly available materials found as of the verification date. The absence of confirmation does not imply the absence of the technology.
TL;DR (for readers who are not into AI)
- What it is: a platform/tools described as an AI assistant for communities and the “community economy” (NLP, knowledge graph and others per the whitepaper).
- Who it’s for: communities/projects that need a bot assistant and automation/support tools.
- Why onchain/token: the onchain fact of the token is confirmed; the necessity of onchain and the role of the token at the protocol level are not established per Tier‑1.
How it works (very briefly)
- The community connects the assistant: the bot/assistant integrates into chats/IM and helps with operations/support.
- AI engine processes requests: the whitepaper lists NLP/knowledge graph and related AI modules.
- Where the blockchain is: the whitepaper describes a “decentralized” vision and integrations with the blockchain ecosystem; separately, a token exists on Ethereum (per the explorer).
- Token role: not established per Tier‑1.
Quick links: AI thesis fit
Project passport
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Project name | Jarvis+ |
| Also known as (aliases) | JarvisplusAI |
| Logo (logo) | ../assets/707_jarvis_logo.svg |
| Token symbol (ticker) | — |
| Category | AI/Agents | Infra |
| Primary chain (chain) | Ethereum |
| Type | EVM |
| Network status | mainnet |
| Consensus (consensus) | PoS (Ethereum) |
| Launch date (launch_date) | — |
| Project status (status) | — |
| Token (standard) | ERC-20 |
| Token contract | 0xa249de6948022783765fee4850d7b85e43118fcc |
| Token model (token_type) | — |
| Max supply | — |
| Issuance | — |
| Tokenomics (tokenomics, brief) | A Tier‑1 description of tokenomics/token utility is not established (the whitepaper used focuses on the product/architecture). |
| Governance | — |
| Admins/keys | — |
| Audit | — |
| Bug bounty | — |
| Team (team) | — |
| Funding (investors/funding) | — |
| AI component (ai_component) | AI assistant for communities (NLP/knowledge graph) |
| Use‑case (use_case) | support automation + community economy |
| DecAI Fit — AI thesis fit | 2/6 — low alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis |
| DecAI Fit component summary | ai_score 2 / onchain_score 1 / token_score 0 / evidence_score 1 |
| Last verified | 2026-02-11 |
Links (links_*)
| Type | Link |
|---|---|
| Website | https://www.jarvisplus.com/ |
| Docs | https://www.jarvisplus.com/res/JarvisPlus%20Whitepaper-v2.0.9-EN.pdf |
| GitHub | https://github.com/x-contract/JarvisPlusToken |
| Releases / Changelog | https://github.com/x-contract/JarvisPlusToken/commits |
| Whitepaper | https://www.jarvisplus.com/res/JarvisPlus%20Whitepaper-v2.0.9-EN.pdf |
| Roadmap | — |
| Security advisories | https://github.com/x-contract/JarvisPlusToken/security |
| Explorer | https://etherscan.io/token/0xa249de6948022783765fee4850d7b85e43118fcc |
| X | https://twitter.com/JarvisplusAI |
| Discord | https://discord.gg/pzesPmc |
| Telegram | https://t.me/jarvisplus |
| Medium | — |
| Audit report(s) | — |
| Bug bounty | — |
| CoinGecko (profile, reference) | — |
| CoinMarketCap (profile, reference) | https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/jarvis/ |
General project overview
Per the Tier‑1 whitepaper, Jarvis+ describes itself as a “decentralized intelligence platform” for community and the economy, with an AI assistant for blockchain communities and integrations into chats/IM. The document highlights AI engine components: NLP, knowledge graph, translation and others, and also describes two-stage development (first services/tools for communities, then a broader data/economy layer).
Features/modules
- AI community assistant: a bot assistant for communities/chats (per the whitepaper description).
- NLP + knowledge graph: claimed AI engine components.
- Infrastructure integration: a description of integration into “community software/app” via a natural language interface.
Typical scenarios
- Scenario 1: a project/community connects the assistant → some support/operations are transferred to an AI bot (per the whitepaper).
- Scenario 2: users interact with blockchain features via a natural language interface (as a claimed goal).
Getting started (wallet/network)
- What you need: access to the project’s product/integrations (not established per Tier‑1, other than the whitepaper).
- Network/chain: Ethereum (the token contract per the explorer).
- Fees: Ethereum network fees for operations with the token.
Architecture/tech (non‑AI)
- Components: offchain assistant services + an onchain token (the contract is given in links_*).
- Where logic runs: AI and product logic — offchain; onchain — the token.
Token/economics (expanded, no forecasts)
- Token utility: No Tier‑1 description of the utility/necessity of the token in the protocol was found.
Governance
- Who makes decisions: not established per Tier‑1.
- How protocol parameters change: not established per Tier‑1.
- Where decisions are discussed/made: not established per Tier‑1.
- Keys/multisig: not established per Tier‑1.
Security and incidents
- Audits: not found in Tier‑1 sources.
- Bug bounty: not found in Tier‑1 sources.
- Incidents: not found in Tier‑1 sources.
- Threat model: not established per Tier‑1.
Project status and timeline
- Current status: —.
- Key releases/milestones: not established per Tier‑1.
- Roadmap: not found in Tier‑1 sources.
Ecosystem/integrations
- Integrations: not established per Tier‑1.
- Partners: not established per Tier‑1.
- Where it’s actually used: not established per Tier‑1.
AI component of the project
- What is real AI here? An AI assistant for communities, NLP/knowledge graph and related AI modules are described in the Tier‑1 whitepaper.
- What is truly onchain? a token on Ethereum (contract in links_*); other onchain mechanics are not established per Tier‑1.
- Why is a token needed? No Tier‑1 source on the necessity of the token was found.
- Red flags (based on the information found): the presence of a token is not confirmed as a necessary mechanism for the AI product to operate; a Tier‑1 document on tokenomics/utility is needed.
DecAI Fit component summary
- DecAI Fit: 2/6 — low alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis
| Component | Level | Score |
|---|---|---|
| AI reality | medium | 2 |
| Onchain necessity | low | 1 |
| Token necessity | low | 0 |
| Evidence | Tier‑1 partial | 1 |
Details
AI reality
AI_0 — AI intent (Tier‑1 roadmap) (1/0)
- AI_0 (decision): 0
- Claim (one line): Tier‑1 sources describe AI as a key part of the product, so the intent flag is not used as the main signal.
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://www.jarvisplus.com/res/JarvisPlus%20Whitepaper-v2.0.9-EN.pdf
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): When AI_1/AI_4 are present, the intent flag does not add quality to the evidence.
- Conflict note (if any): —
AI_1 — what the AI does (1/0)
- AI_1 (decision): 1
- Claim (one line): An AI assistant for communities/chats: reduces the workload of creation/management/support (per the description).
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://www.jarvisplus.com/res/JarvisPlus%20Whitepaper-v2.0.9-EN.pdf
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): The whitepaper directly describes the AI assistant and its purpose.
- Conflict note (if any): —
AI_2 — demos/examples (1/0)
- AI_2 (decision): 0
- Claim (one line): A demo/app (what you can touch) was not found per Tier‑1.
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://www.jarvisplus.com/
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): AI_2=1 requires a verifiable demo surface.
- Conflict note (if any): —
AI_3 — metrics/quality (1/0)
- AI_3 (decision): 0
- Metrics: —
- Context (version/date/how measured): —
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://www.jarvisplus.com/res/JarvisPlus%20Whitepaper-v2.0.9-EN.pdf
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): No reproducible set of AI engine quality metrics was found per Tier‑1.
- Conflict note (if any): —
AI_4 — tech description/architecture/versions (1/0)
- AI_4 (decision): 1
- Claim (one line): The whitepaper describes the platform architecture and AI engine (NLP, knowledge graph and others).
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://www.jarvisplus.com/res/JarvisPlus%20Whitepaper-v2.0.9-EN.pdf
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): The document provides technical context and an architectural layer.
- Conflict note (if any): —
Onchain necessity
OC_1 — contracts/addresses/chain (1/0)
- OC_1 (decision): 1
- Chain: Ethereum
- Addresses/identifiers: ERC‑20: 0xa249de6948022783765fee4850d7b85e43118fcc
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://etherscan.io/token/0xa249de6948022783765fee4850d7b85e43118fcc
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): The onchain fact of the token contract is confirmed by the explorer.
- Conflict note (if any): —
OC_2 — onchain beyond just a token (1/0)
- OC_2 (decision): 0
- What useful logic is onchain: not established per Tier‑1 (other than the fact of the token).
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://www.jarvisplus.com/res/JarvisPlus%20Whitepaper-v2.0.9-EN.pdf
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): The whitepaper discusses blockchain integrations but does not provide specific onchain addresses/contracts other than the token.
- Conflict note (if any): —
OC_3 — onchain is critical (1/0)
- OC_3 (decision): 0
- “Replace the blockchain” test: not established per Tier‑1.
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://www.jarvisplus.com/res/JarvisPlus%20Whitepaper-v2.0.9-EN.pdf
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is no explicit argument for onchain criticality.
- Conflict note (if any): —
Token necessity
TK_0 — no token (1/0)
- TK_0 (decision): 0
- Claim (one line): The project has a token (the contract is given in links_*).
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://etherscan.io/token/0xa249de6948022783765fee4850d7b85e43118fcc
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): The token contract is observable.
- Conflict note (if any): —
TK_1..TK_4 (1/0)
TK_1 — payment for the service (1/0)
- TK_1 (decision): 0
- Claim (one line): Pay‑for‑service mechanics using the token are not established per Tier‑1.
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://www.jarvisplus.com/res/JarvisPlus%20Whitepaper-v2.0.9-EN.pdf
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): TK_1=1 requires an explicit description of payments with the token.
- Conflict note (if any): —
TK_2 — incentives/collateral/penalties (1/0)
- TK_2 (decision): 0
- Claim (one line): Incentives/collateral/penalties are not established per Tier‑1.
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://www.jarvisplus.com/res/JarvisPlus%20Whitepaper-v2.0.9-EN.pdf
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is no explicit description of staking/penalties.
- Conflict note (if any): —
TK_3 — governance (1/0)
- TK_3 (decision): 0
- Claim (one line): Governance use of the token is not established per Tier‑1.
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://www.jarvisplus.com/res/JarvisPlus%20Whitepaper-v2.0.9-EN.pdf
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is no description of token governance.
- Conflict note (if any): —
TK_4 — token is replaceable (1/0)
- TK_4 (decision): 0
- Claim (one line): The replaceability of the token is not established per Tier‑1.
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://www.jarvisplus.com/res/JarvisPlus%20Whitepaper-v2.0.9-EN.pdf
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): Insufficient data.
- Conflict note (if any): —
Evidence (table)
| Tier | Source | What it proves |
|---|---|---|
| Tier‑1 | https://www.jarvisplus.com/res/JarvisPlus%20Whitepaper-v2.0.9-EN.pdf | Tier‑1 description of the Jarvis+ product (AI assistant, NLP/knowledge graph) and architecture/stages. |
| Tier‑1 | https://etherscan.io/token/0xa249de6948022783765fee4850d7b85e43118fcc | Onchain fact of the ERC‑20 token (contract). |
| Tier‑1 | — | No Tier‑1 source for claim “why is a token needed (utility at the protocol level)” was found. |
No comments to display
No comments to display