Skip to main content

UA1

UA1 — 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).

UA1 — an AI/Agents project on Ethereum, token (symbol: UA1).

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: infrastructure for deploying autonomous AI agents (persistent, economically active agents) — as claimed in the Tier‑1 documentation.
  • Who it’s for: developers/operators who want to deploy and maintain autonomous agents (as claimed).
  • Why onchain/token: the onchain part is confirmed at the token level on the Ethereum network; the token utility is not briefly disclosed in Tier‑1.

How it works (very briefly)

  1. The user does: describes the agent’s mission/behavior and deploys it in the target environment (as claimed).
  2. The system does: provides identity/memory/skills/observability and a “multi‑compute provider” architecture (as claimed).
  3. The user gets: an autonomous agent that can act and improve over time (as claimed).
  4. Where the blockchain is: an onchain artifact of the $UA1 token on Ethereum is confirmed; protocol contracts (other than the token) are not established.
  5. Token role (if any): supply parameters/distribution are described in the tokenomics; utility — not established per Tier‑1.

Quick links: AI thesis fit

Project passport

Field Value
Project name UA1
Also known as (aliases) $UA1
Logo (logo) ../assets/897_ua1_logo.png
Token symbol (ticker) UA1
Category AI/Agents | Infra
Primary chain (chain) Ethereum
Type EVM
Network status mainnet
Consensus (consensus) PoS (Ethereum)
Launch date (launch_date) —
Project status (status) active
Token (standard) ERC-20
Token contract 0x25ed873e64edc5d9769e2037f7098c110efd6111
Token model (token_type) —
Max supply 100 000 000 UA1
Issuance fixed supply: 100 000 000 UA1
Tokenomics (tokenomics, brief) Liquidity at TGE 60%; Treasury reserve 15% (9 months linear); Strategic funds 10% (24 months linear); Community incentives 5% (6 months linear); Marketing/events 10% (2 months linear).
Governance —
Admins/keys —
Audit —
Bug bounty —
Team (team) —
Funding (investors/funding) —
AI component (ai_component) autonomous agents (identity/memory/skills)
Use‑case (use_case) infrastructure for persistent AI agents
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 0
Last verified 2026-02-11

General project overview

UA1 describes itself as “programmable infrastructure” for deploying autonomous agents (not “chatbots”) that have identity, memory, skills and behavioral logic. The documentation also describes a “multi‑compute provider” (MCP) approach and a set of infrastructure layers for deployment and observability.

Features/modules

  • Agent encapsulation: identity/memory/skills/behavior logic (claimed).
  • MCP architecture: selection of a compute runtime depending on the mission/security (claimed).
  • Observability & deployment: Monitoring/Deployment/Observability sections (claimed).

Typical scenarios

  • Scenario 1: a developer describes an agent and its environment → deploys the agent as a “labor unit” (as claimed).
  • Scenario 2: an operator monitors and updates the agent → gets stable behavior/observability (as claimed).

Getting started (wallet/network)

  • What you need: UA1 documentation (see links_*); for operations with the token — an EVM wallet.
  • Network/chain: Ethereum ($UA1 token).
  • Fees: Ethereum network fees for operations with the contract/token.

Architecture/tech (non‑AI)

  • Components (per Tier‑1): infrastructure layers, developer SDK / plug‑in framework, monitoring/deployment/observability.
  • Where logic runs: compute‑agnostic (claimed); the onchain part is confirmed at least at the token level.
  • Dependencies: —.

Token/economics (expanded, no forecasts)

  • Token utility: not established (the available Tier‑1 tokenomics describes supply and distribution).
  • Issuance: fixed supply 100M.
  • Distribution (Tier‑1): liquidity at TGE 60%; treasury reserve 15% (9 months linear); strategic funds 10% (24 months linear); community incentives 5% (6 months linear); marketing/events 10% (2 months linear).

Governance

  • Who makes decisions: not established (no Tier‑1).
  • How protocol parameters change: —.

Security and incidents

  • Audits: not established.
  • Bug bounty: not established.
  • Incidents: not established.
  • Threat model: depends on the implementation of the protocol/contracts; not established per Tier‑1.

Project status and timeline

  • Current status: active (based on the publication of documentation).
  • Roadmap: there is a separate Roadmap page (see links_*).

Ecosystem/integrations

  • Integrations: —.
  • Partners: there is a Team & Partners page (see docs).
  • Where it’s actually used: not established in the form of verifiable production cases per Tier‑1.

AI component of the project

  • What is real AI here? Tier‑1 describes autonomous agents (reason/evolve/operate) and infrastructure components around them.
  • What is truly onchain? the $UA1 token on Ethereum is confirmed; the protocol’s onchain logic (other than the token) is not established.
  • Why is a token needed? supply and distribution are described in the Tier‑1 tokenomics; the token utility is not established.
  • Red flags (based on the information found): absence of a Tier‑1 description of the token utility; absence of addresses/contracts for protocol logic (other than the token).

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 present 0
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 entity (autonomous agents), not as roadmap intent.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.ua1.ai/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): AI_0 is used for “intent without implementation”; here Tier‑1 describes a system of agents.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_1 — what the AI does (1/0)

  • AI_1 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): UA1 describes autonomous agents as “persistent, intelligent, economically active agents” with identity/memory/skills.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.ua1.ai/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): Tier‑1 directly states the purpose and properties of the agents.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_2 — demos/examples (1/0)

  • AI_2 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): No public link to an application/demo was found in Tier‑1.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.ua1.ai/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): The documentation describes the system, but a demo surface is not established.
  • 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.ua1.ai/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): No reproducible set of quality metrics was found in Tier‑1.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

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

  • AI_4 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): Tier‑1 has sections “Technical Architecture”, “Infrastructure Layers”, “Monitoring/Observability”.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.ua1.ai/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): The documentation provides technical context and the structure of the system.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Onchain necessity

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

  • OC_1 (decision): 1
  • Chain: Ethereum
  • Addresses/identifiers: token contract 0x25ed873e64edc5d9769e2037f7098c110efd6111
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://etherscan.io/token/0x25ed873e64edc5d9769e2037f7098c110efd6111
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is an onchain artifact (the token contract) and an 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 (other than the token).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.ua1.ai/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): Addresses/contracts for protocol logic were not found.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

OC_3 — onchain is critical (1/0)

  • OC_3 (decision): 0
  • “Replace the blockchain” test: it is not established that the product breaks down without onchain.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.ua1.ai/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is no Tier‑1 justification of 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 claimed token, $UA1.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.ua1.ai/resource/tokenomics
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): The Tier‑1 tokenomics gives the ticker/network/total supply.
  • 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): No description of “payment for the service” with the token was found in the Tier‑1 tokenomics.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.ua1.ai/resource/tokenomics
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): 1 requires an explicit description of utility.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

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

  • TK_2 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): No description of incentives/collateral/penalties was found in the Tier‑1 tokenomics.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.ua1.ai/resource/tokenomics
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): 1 requires explicit incentives/staking/slashing mechanics.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_3 — governance (1/0)

  • TK_3 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): There is no description of the token’s governance mechanics in the Tier‑1 tokenomics.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.ua1.ai/resource/tokenomics
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): 1 requires an explicit governance/voting process.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_4 — token is replaceable (1/0)

  • TK_4 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): The replaceability of the token without loss of meaning is not established per Tier‑1.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.ua1.ai/resource/tokenomics
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): 1 requires an explicit justification of replaceability.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Evidence (table)

Tier Source What it proves
Tier‑1 https://docs.ua1.ai/ Description of the UA1 product as infrastructure for autonomous agents; MCP architecture and basic definitions.
Tier‑1 https://docs.ua1.ai/resource/tokenomics Ticker $UA1; Ethereum network; total supply 100 000 000; distribution and lock/unlock.
Tier‑1 https://etherscan.io/token/0x25ed873e64edc5d9769e2037f7098c110efd6111 Onchain artifact: the token contract on Ethereum.
Tier‑1 — No Tier‑1 source on the token utility (payments/incentives/governance) was found.
Tier‑1 — No Tier‑1 source on the protocol’s onchain logic other than the token was found.

No comments to display

Back to top