Skip to main content

Treasure

Treasure (MAGIC) — 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).

Treasure / Treasure DAO — an AI/Agents | Gaming project: an ecosystem of “AI‑native collectibles” and an “agentic universe” (Agent Creator + in‑game agents), where the MAGIC token is used by agents to pay for compute/onchain services and for governance.

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 ecosystem of games/agents where an NFT can be turned into an autonomous agent (plays/trades/performs tasks) that interacts with Treasure’s onchain contracts.
  • Who it’s for: players/collectors and users who want an “AI agent” for games/DeFi/dApps; developers in the Treasure ecosystem.
  • Why onchain/token: assets/contracts and governance are recorded onchain; the MAGIC token is the utility currency of the ecosystem and the governance token (staking → gMAGIC).
  • What you can actually touch (Tier‑1): treasure.lol/agents (Agent Creator) + the docs on Agent Creator/AI+Gaming.

How it works (very briefly)

  1. The user does: selects/connects an NFT and launches an agent via Agent Creator.
  2. The system does: creates an “agent NFT/agent profile” (claimed) and gives the agent the ability to perform actions (game/trade/learn) and interact with dApps/games; “progressive learning” and the transfer of “memories” are described (Tier‑1 docs).
  3. The user gets: an autonomous agent that can play/perform tasks and accumulate “skill/history” (claimed).
  4. Where the blockchain is: Treasure’s production contracts (including MAGIC and governance staking) are on Arbitrum One; the onchain part includes assets/marketplace/game contracts (Tier‑1 contracts).
  5. Token role: MAGIC is used by agents to pay for compute and onchain services and as the governance token (Tier‑1 MAGIC intro + governance).

Quick links: AI thesis fit

Project passport

Field Value
Project name Treasure
Also known as (aliases) Treasure DAO | Agent Creator | Bridgeworld | Magicswap
Logo (logo) ../assets/70_magic-token_logo.svg
Token symbol (ticker) MAGIC
Category AI/Agents | Gaming
Primary chain (chain) Arbitrum One
Type EVM
Network status mainnet
Consensus (consensus) L2 (Optimistic Rollup, Arbitrum One on Ethereum)
Launch date (launch_date) 2021
Project status (status) active
Token (standard) ERC-20
Token contract 0x539bdE0d7Dbd336b79148AA742883198BBF60342
Token model (token_type) utility (payments + staking + governance)
Max supply 347,714,007
Issuance inflationary (capped)
Tokenomics (tokenomics, brief) annual halvening (every year); total supply 347,714,007 (Tier‑1 tokenomics).
Governance DAO
Admins/keys multisig
Audit yes
Bug bounty —
Team (team) —
Funding (investors/funding) —
AI component (ai_component) AI game agents (Neurochimp framework)
Use‑case (use_case) AI agents for gaming/trading/dApps
DecAI Fit — AI thesis fit 6/6 — high alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis
DecAI Fit component summary ai_score 3 / onchain_score 3 / token_score 3 / evidence_score 3
Last verified 2026-02-11

General project overview

Treasure describes itself as an ecosystem that builds “AI‑native collectibles” and an “agentic universe”: assets (NFTs) become autonomous entities that “live” in games and dApps. The Tier‑1 documentation has two key product blocks: Agent Creator (creating an agent from an NFT) and AI+Gaming (in‑game agents that can play, form guilds, etc., with claimed learning/memory).

The onchain part is confirmed via the list of production contracts on Arbitrum One and via the MAGIC token contract. The governance documentation describes the TIP→forum→Snapshot process and the gMAGIC mechanism (voting weight based on staking/LP positions).

Features/modules

  • Agent Creator: “Transform any NFT into an intelligent, autonomous agent” + all‑in‑one agent, progressive learning, cross‑chain, soulbound agents (Tier‑1).
  • AI+Gaming: in‑game agents based on the Neurochimp AI Framework (Tier‑1).
  • MAGIC: the utility token “agents pay for compute and onchain services” + governance token (Tier‑1).
  • Governance: TIP→forum→Snapshot; gMAGIC as the voting model; treasury/multisigs (Tier‑1).
  • Contracts/Audits: the list of production addresses and links to audit reports (Tier‑1).

Typical scenarios

  • Scenario 1 (user): launches an agent via treasure.lol/agents → gets an autonomous agent for tasks (trade/game/research) (Tier‑1).
  • Scenario 2 (player): uses an in‑game agent for onchain/game activities → the agent “learns” and carries over memory/strategies (claimed) (Tier‑1).
  • Scenario 3 (governance): stakes/holds MAGIC in gMAGIC forms → votes on Snapshot on TIPs (Tier‑1).

Getting started (wallet/network)

  • What you need: an EVM wallet; access to treasure.lol/agents (Agent Creator) and/or app.treasure.lol.
  • Network/chain: Arbitrum One (Treasure’s production contracts).
  • Fees: Arbitrum fees for onchain actions; acquiring/using MAGIC — per the terms of the venues.

Architecture/tech (non‑AI)

  • Components (onchain): MAGIC (ERC‑20), governance staking (gMAGIC), the marketplace and game contracts (Tier‑1 contracts).
  • Components (offchain): AI agents/framework (Neurochimp) and compute execution (described as “agents pay for compute”) (Tier‑1).
  • Participant roles: users/players, gMAGIC holders (governance), core contributors, DAO multisig operators.
  • Where logic runs: onchain — asset ownership and protocol contracts; offchain — agent compute/inference.
  • Dependencies: Arbitrum One (L2), web interfaces (treasure.lol, docs), third‑party games/engines (Unity is mentioned).

Token/economics (expanded, no forecasts)

  • Token utility: MAGIC — a utility token (agents pay for compute/onchain services) and governance token (Tier‑1).
  • Protocol necessity drivers: in Agent Creator/AI+Gaming, MAGIC is described as the source of the “compute flow” and “access upgrades”; in governance — voting power via gMAGIC (Tier‑1).
  • Who pays fees: users performing onchain operations (Arbitrum gas).
  • Where fees go: — (not established per Tier‑1 within this card).
  • Issuance/burn: the tokenomics describe issuance with yearly halving, total supply 347,714,007 (Tier‑1).
  • Security/incentive mechanisms: staking MAGIC for governance (gMAGIC) (Tier‑1).
  • Distribution and token issuance schedule: ratios and the curve are described in the tokenomics (Tier‑1).
  • Treasury: the governance page mentions the DAO treasury and multisigs (Tier‑1).

Governance

  • Who makes decisions: a DAO; governance is run by staked MAGIC holders (gMAGIC) (Tier‑1).
  • How protocol parameters change: TIP discussion on the forum → Snapshot voting → implementation by the DAO (Tier‑1).
  • Where decisions are discussed/made: the governance forum and Snapshot (Tier‑1).
  • Keys/multisig: treasury/multisigs exist; links to the public resources repository (Tier‑1).

Security and incidents

  • Audits: there is a list of audit reports (Quantstamp/Macro and others) (Tier‑1 audits).
  • Bug bounty: — (no Tier‑1 public bug bounty was found).
  • Incidents: —.
  • Threat model: smart contract risks (games/marketplace), the risks of centralized offchain compute for agents, the risks of “progressive learning” promises without benchmarks.

Project status and timeline

  • Current status: active (the docs, Agent Creator and governance are available; contracts on Arbitrum One).
  • Key releases/milestones: — (releases were not listed in this card).
  • Roadmap: there is a public roadmap (Tier‑1).

Ecosystem/integrations

  • Integrations: in‑game agents; Unity and onchain games are mentioned; the agent creator claims multi‑chain integrations (Tier‑1).
  • Partners: — (the docs contain “partnered with”, but without a formalized list).
  • Where it’s actually used: the Agent Creator website and the docs with use cases/descriptions (Tier‑1).

AI component of the project

  • What is real AI here? “agents” for games/actions, the Neurochimp AI Framework is described, progressive learning/memory (Tier‑1).
  • What is truly onchain? Treasure’s production contracts on Arbitrum One (MAGIC, staking, marketplace/game contracts) (Tier‑1).
  • Why is a token needed? MAGIC — a utility token (payment for compute/onchain services) and governance token (gMAGIC) (Tier‑1).
  • Red flags (based on the information found): AI‑washing (no learning metrics/benchmarks), the centralization of offchain compute, verify the actual guarantees of “agent wallet/financial autonomy”.

DecAI Fit component summary

  • DecAI Fit: 6/6 — high alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis
Component Level Score
AI reality high 3
Onchain necessity high 3
Token necessity high 3
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 claimed as a current part of the product (agent creator + in‑game agents), not as intent.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.treasure.lol/introduction
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the intent flag is not needed.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_1 — what the AI does (1/0)

  • AI_1 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): agents perform actions (game/trade/research), learn and carry over “memories/strategy” (claimed) within the TreasureAI suite.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.treasure.lol/agentcreator , https://docs.treasure.lol/aigaming
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): Tier‑1 describes the agents’ functions and the AI framework (high‑level).
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_2 — demos/examples (1/0)

  • AI_2 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): there is a public agent launch page (Agent Creator) with the steps “create/power/deploy”.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://treasure.lol/agents , https://docs.treasure.lol/agentcreator
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): a reproducible entry into the product (what you can touch).
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_3 — metrics/quality (1/0)

  • AI_3 (decision): 0
  • Metrics: —.
  • Context (version/date/how measured): —.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.treasure.lol/aigaming
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there are no learning/gameplay quality benchmarks in Tier‑1.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

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

  • AI_4 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): the Agent Creator and AI+Gaming modules, the progressive learning mechanics and the roles of MAGIC are described.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.treasure.lol/agentcreator , https://docs.treasure.lol/magic/introduction
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there is a high‑level technical description/modular structure.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Onchain necessity

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

  • OC_1 (decision): 1
  • Chain: Arbitrum One.
  • Addresses/identifiers: the MAGIC token (ERC‑20) 0x539bdE0d7Dbd336b79148AA742883198BBF60342; governance staking (gMAGIC) 0xc0e641c7ea263166a238285556ff61fdf37a4c79.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.treasure.lol/contracts , https://arbiscan.io/token/0x539bdE0d7Dbd336b79148AA742883198BBF60342
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the contracts page records the production addresses; the explorer confirms the token.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

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

  • OC_2 (decision): 1
  • What useful logic is onchain: the marketplace/game contracts, governance staking, other Treasure production contracts on Arbitrum One.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.treasure.lol/contracts
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): Tier‑1 lists a set of protocol contracts, not just the token.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

OC_3 — onchain is critical (1/0)

  • OC_3 (decision): 1
  • “Replace the blockchain” test: without the onchain layer, asset ownership/the ecosystem contracts and governance break down; this is a core part of Treasure.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.treasure.lol/contracts , https://docs.treasure.lol/governance
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the docs explicitly record that the production contracts and governance live on Arbitrum.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Token necessity

TK_0 — no token (1/0)

  • TK_0 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): the project has a token, MAGIC (ERC‑20), on Arbitrum One.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.treasure.lol/contracts , https://arbiscan.io/token/0x539bdE0d7Dbd336b79148AA742883198BBF60342
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the token is confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_1..TK_4 (1/0)

TK_1 — payment for the service (1/0)

  • TK_1 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): MAGIC is used by agents to pay for compute and onchain services.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.treasure.lol/magic/introduction
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): this is stated directly in “What is MAGIC?”.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

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

  • TK_2 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): governance rights are tied to staked MAGIC (gMAGIC), not to “liquid MAGIC”.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.treasure.lol/governance
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the governance docs describe gMAGIC as derived from staking/LP positions.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_3 — governance (1/0)

  • TK_3 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): Treasure’s governance is run by staked MAGIC holders via Snapshot voting.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.treasure.lol/governance
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the governance page describes the process and eligibility.
  • 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 proven: MAGIC is described as the central currency and governance token.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.treasure.lol/magic/introduction
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): without the token, the payment/governance model breaks down.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Evidence (table)

Tier Source What it proves
Tier‑1 https://docs.treasure.lol/introduction the positioning of Treasure as AI‑native collectibles/agentic universe; the role of MAGIC.
Tier‑1 https://docs.treasure.lol/agentcreator Agent Creator: creating an agent from an NFT, progressive learning, soulbound agents; the role of MAGIC.
Tier‑1 https://treasure.lol/agents the public “launch agent” page (AI_2 demo).
Tier‑1 https://docs.treasure.lol/aigaming AI+Gaming: the Neurochimp AI Framework, descriptions of in‑game agent capabilities.
Tier‑1 https://docs.treasure.lol/magic/introduction MAGIC: utility token (compute+onchain services) + governance token.
Tier‑1 https://docs.treasure.lol/magic/tokenomics issuance/halvening; total supply 347,714,007.
Tier‑1 https://docs.treasure.lol/governance governance process, gMAGIC, Snapshot voting, multisigs.
Tier‑1 https://docs.treasure.lol/contracts the list of production contracts on Arbitrum One (MAGIC, gMAGIC, marketplace and others).
Tier‑1 https://docs.treasure.lol/audits links to audit reports (Quantstamp/Macro).
Tier‑1 https://docs.treasure.lol/public-roadmap public roadmap (Notion).
Tier‑1 https://arbiscan.io/token/0x539bdE0d7Dbd336b79148AA742883198BBF60342 the onchain fact of the MAGIC token on Arbitrum One.

No comments to display

Back to top