Skip to main content

Mantis1

Mantis1 — 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).

Mantis1 — an AI/Agents | Infra project on the Solana network, token (symbol: M).

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: an AI agent stack for DeFi that combines personal AI agents and intent‑based execution via a solver network (chain abstraction).
  • Who it’s for: DeFi users (including swaps on Ethereum/Solana and between them) and participants/operators of the solver network.
  • Why onchain/token: Tier‑1 describes $M as a token for governance and solver bonds (entry bonds with possible slashing for non-execution); a bond for onboarding AI agents is also claimed.
  • What you can actually touch (Tier‑1): Personalized Agents (live now) with a claimed ability to swap on Ethereum/Solana and between them.

How it works (very briefly)

  1. The user does: forms an intent (for example, “swap X→Y”) via an interface/agent.
  2. The system does: solvers receive the intent, build a solution (route) and compete for best execution; the auctioneer selects the winner.
  3. The user gets: execution of the intent (transactions/swap) and the result according to the specified parameters.
  4. Where the blockchain is: $M and its circulation are recorded onchain on Solana; execution of intents leads to onchain transactions on the target networks.
  5. Token role (if any): governance + solver bonds (+ claimed: a bond for onboarding AI agents).

Quick links: AI thesis fit

Project passport

Field Value
Project name Mantis1
Also known as (aliases) —
Logo (logo) ../assets/889_mantis1_logo.png
Token symbol (ticker) M
Category AI/Agents | Infra
Primary chain (chain) Solana
Type non-EVM
Network status mainnet
Consensus (consensus) PoS (Solana)
Launch date (launch_date) —
Project status (status) active
Token (standard) SPL
Token contract Mant1sZcb8x2YMZe7RdqSfStCj4YxjmQByNKyHpLJK9
Token model (token_type) utility (staking + governance)
Max supply 100 000 000
Issuance —
Tokenomics (tokenomics, brief) 32.2% for community+ecosystem (launch campaign + ecosystem incentives); the rest — treasury/backers/team (see Tier‑1).
Governance token governance (forum + Realms)
Admins/keys —
Audit —
Bug bounty —
Team (team) —
Funding (investors/funding) —
AI component (ai_component) personal AI agents for DeFi (DISE LLM)
Use‑case (use_case) intent-based execution + swaps (single/cross-chain)
DecAI Fit — AI thesis fit 5/6 — high alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis
DecAI Fit component summary 3 / 1 / 2 / 3
Last verified 2026-02-11

General project overview

Per Tier‑1 sources, Mantis describes an “AI agent stack” for DeFi and intent‑based execution via a solver network, where solvers compete for best execution. Tier‑1 also describes the basic properties of the $M token (Solana, supply, distribution) and its claimed utility: governance rights, solver bonds (and a bond for onboarding AI agents).

Features/modules

  • Personalized Agents: claimed to be live now.
  • Solver network: execution of intents through solver competition and selection of the best route.
  • $M token: governance + bonds for solvers (and claimed: onboarding AI agents).

Typical scenarios

  • Scenario 1: a user creates an intent for a swap → solvers build solutions → the winner executes.
  • Scenario 2: a solver joins the network and executes intents (with reward/slashing conditions).

Getting started (wallet/network)

  • What you need: a wallet that supports Solana.
  • Network/chain: Solana.
  • Fees: Solana network fees for transfers/operations.

Architecture/tech (non‑AI)

  • Components: solver network, mempool intents, auctioneer, execution mechanics (swaps) and the $M token on Solana.
  • Participant roles: users (sign intents), solvers (build/execute solutions), auctioneer (winner selection), $M holders.
  • Where logic runs: intents are formed offchain but lead to onchain execution of solutions; $M and its accounting — onchain on Solana.
  • Dependencies: infrastructure of the target networks (Solana/Ethereum and others), RPC/wallets.

Token/economics (expanded, no forecasts)

  • Token utility: governance rights; solver bonds (slashing for non-execution); claimed: a bond for onboarding AI agents.
  • Protocol necessity drivers: bonds are used as a mechanism for solver entry/accountability; governance — as a decision-making mechanism.
  • Who pays fees: users of the Solana network.
  • Where fees go: to the Solana network validators (per the network rules).
  • Issuance/burn: —.
  • Security/incentive mechanisms: —.
  • Distribution and token issuance schedule: —.
  • Treasury: —.

Governance

  • Who makes decisions: —.
  • How protocol parameters change: —.
  • Keys/multisig: —.

Security and incidents

  • Audits: —.
  • Bug bounty: —.
  • Incidents: —.
  • Threat model: risks are typical for tokens and wallet/RPC infrastructure; without a Tier‑1 description of the product, the threat model is not established.

Project status and timeline

  • Current status: mainnet (based on the fact of the token’s existence on the network).
  • Key releases/milestones: —.
  • Roadmap: —.

Ecosystem/integrations

  • Integrations: —.
  • Partners: —.
  • Where it’s actually used: —.

AI component of the project

  • What is real AI here? Tier‑1 describes AI‑powered financials and personal AI agents, “powered by DISE LLM”.
  • What is truly onchain? The SPL token on the Solana network (mint and transactions — onchain).
  • Why is a token needed? Tier‑1 describes governance and solver bonds (including slashing for non-execution), plus a claimed bond for onboarding AI agents.
  • Red flags (based on the information found): absence of Tier‑1 quality metrics for DISE/agents (AI_3=0); part of “slashing” is described as permissioned/off‑chain at launch.

DecAI Fit component summary

  • DecAI Fit: 5/6 — high alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis
Component Level Score
AI reality medium 3
Onchain necessity low (token only) 1
Token necessity medium 2
Evidence Tier‑1 present 3
Details

AI reality

AI_0 — AI intent (Tier‑1 roadmap) (1/0)

  • AI_0 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): AI is described as a working part of the product (AI agent stack), not only as “intent/roadmap”.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.mantis.app/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): when a Tier‑1 description of AI functionality is present, AI_0 adds no signal (AI_1/AI_2/AI_4 already cover it).
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_1 — what the AI does (1/0)

  • AI_1 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): Mantis describes personal AI agents for AI‑powered financials in DeFi.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.mantis.app/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): Tier‑1 directly describes the purpose of AI agents and their role in the product.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_2 — demos/examples (1/0)

  • AI_2 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): Tier‑1 describes Personalized Agents as “live now” and claims supported swap scenarios.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.mantis.app/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the presence of a described live product and a public entry point is sufficient as a demo surface.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_3 — metrics/quality (1/0)

  • AI_3 (decision): 0
  • Metrics: not found.
  • Context (version/date/how measured): not found.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): no Tier‑1 metrics/context → 0.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_4 — tech description/architecture/versions (1/0)

  • AI_4 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): Tier‑1 describes DISE as an LLM framework and the overall product stack/architecture (solver network + intents).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.mantis.app/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there is Tier‑1 technical context on the key components and the role of the LLM/agents.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Onchain necessity

OC_1 — contracts/addresses/chain (1/0)

  • OC_1 (decision): 1
  • Chain: Solana
  • Addresses/identifiers: mint = Mant1sZcb8x2YMZe7RdqSfStCj4YxjmQByNKyHpLJK9
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://solscan.io/token/Mant1sZcb8x2YMZe7RdqSfStCj4YxjmQByNKyHpLJK9
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the block explorer confirms the token address on the network.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

OC_2 — onchain beyond just a token (1/0)

  • OC_2 (decision): 0
  • What useful logic is onchain: Tier‑1 describes intents/solvers mechanics, but contract addresses/the network “layer” for onchain logic beyond the token are not recorded in this card.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): without specific onchain artifacts (addresses/events), we set 0 (conservatively).
  • Conflict note (if any): —

OC_3 — onchain is critical (1/0)

  • OC_3 (decision): 0
  • “Replace the blockchain” test: not established (no Tier‑1 description of the product).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): without a Tier‑1 justification of criticality, we set 0.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Token necessity

TK_0 — no token (1/0)

  • TK_0 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): the token exists (SPL on Solana).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://solscan.io/token/Mant1sZcb8x2YMZe7RdqSfStCj4YxjmQByNKyHpLJK9
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the token is identified by the mint address.
  • 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): not established (no Tier‑1 description of payment utility).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): without a Tier‑1 description of utility, we set 0.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_2 — incentives/collateral/penalties (1/0)

  • TK_2 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): Tier‑1 describes solver bonds and slashing for non-execution/non-compliant execution.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.mantis.app/m/overview ; https://docs.mantis.app/protocol/solvers
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): bonds + slashing are a mechanism for participant accountability/incentives.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_3 — governance (1/0)

  • TK_3 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): Tier‑1 describes governance rights for $M and voting via Realms (after discussion on the forum).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.mantis.app/m/overview
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the presence of a described governance process and role of the token is sufficient for TK_3=1.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_4 — token is replaceable (1/0)

  • TK_4 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): not established (no Tier‑1 allowing replaceability to be assessed).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): with insufficient data, we set 0 (conservatively).
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Evidence (table)

Tier Source What it proves
Tier‑1 https://docs.mantis.app/ Description of the product as an AI agent stack for DeFi; intent‑based execution; Personalized Agents (live now).
Tier‑1 https://docs.mantis.app/m/overview The $M token: supply, distribution and utility (governance rights + solver bonds + AI agent launching bond).
Tier‑1 https://docs.mantis.app/protocol/solvers Description of the solver role, competition for best execution and reward/slashing conditions.
Tier‑1 https://solscan.io/token/Mant1sZcb8x2YMZe7RdqSfStCj4YxjmQByNKyHpLJK9 Address of the $M SPL token on the Solana network (onchain fact).
Tier‑2 https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/mantis1/ Reference token profile (metadata, links).

No comments to display

Back to top