Outcomes Protocol
Monthly Budget $4,012 / $5,000
AC

Customer Service

Resolve issues and support customers with AI-powered assistance

from $0.15 94% success

Code

Review, fix, and generate code with automated quality assurance

from $0.50 91% success

Legal

Review, draft, and research legal documents with AI analysis

from $2.00 96% success

Medical

Clinical documentation, coding, and patient record summaries

from $1.00 98% success
1 Context
2 Tools
3 Success
4 Delivery
5 Pricing
6 Review

Your Data Sources

Connect your systems so the AI can access relevant information. Execution engines may use additional resources (databases, APIs) with costs included in the outcome price.

📚 Knowledge Base Connected
help.acme.com - 1,247 articles synced
📦 Product Catalog Connected
MCP Server: products.acme.internal
👤 Customer Data Connected
MCP Server: crm.acme.internal
📄 Policy Documents Not configured
Upload refund policy, shipping terms, etc.

Tools & Actions

What actions can the AI take to complete this outcome?

Read-Only Actions

Write Actions

High impact action - requires approval

Success Criteria

When does this outcome count as successful?

Success Definition

Inquiry resolved without escalation and without customer reopening the issue.

You report success or failure via the Conversions API based on what happens after the conversation ends.

You will report via cAPI:

outcome.success Ticket closed AND no reopen within 7 days
outcome.failure Escalated to human OR customer reopened

Optional Enrichment Signals

Report these when available to help optimize provider matching (not required for success).

Delivery & Escalation

Configure timing and human handoff settings

Delivery Time

Maximum time to complete the outcome

Escalation Policy

Escalate when:

Handoff destination:

Include in handoff:

Bid Strategy

How would you like to control costs?

No additional configuration needed. The system will optimize to deliver as many successful outcomes as possible within your budget.

Aim for this average cost per successful outcome. Individual costs may vary.

$ per outcome
Market average: $0.40 for this outcome type

Never pay more than this amount per outcome. You may win fewer outcomes if your cap is below market rate.

$ max per outcome

Target return on agent spend. For example, 1.5 means $1.50 in outcome value per $1.00 spent. Adherence to ROAS target is not guaranteed.

target ROAS

Requires reporting outcome_value (buyer-provided) via cAPI for each outcome.

Maximum spend per month. Delivery stops when budget is exhausted.

$
Estimated outcomes: varies by market conditions

Review & Launch

Review your configuration before launching

Outcome

Type Customer Service - Resolve Inquiry
Verification cAPI-verified (you report success/failure)

Context Sources

Knowledge Base Product Catalog Customer Data

Tools

Order Lookup Process Refund ($50 max) Apply Discount

Success Criteria

Inquiry resolved without escalation and without customer reopening within 7 days

Delivery

Response SLA Streaming (< 2 seconds)
Escalation Enabled - Zendesk Tier 2

Pricing Summary

Strategy Cost per result goal
Target Cost $0.45/outcome
Monthly Budget $5,000
Est. Outcomes ~11,111/month
Outcomes 1,847 +12%
Spend $4,012 -3%
Success Rate 94.2% +1.5%
Avg Cost $4.88 Target: $5.00
Avg Latency 47s Target: 60s
Escalation 5.8% -0.5%

Cost Optimization

The system learns from successful outcomes and claim-free deliveries to reduce costs over time

Learning Active 1,847 outcomes · 3 claims
Jan 1 Jan 6 Jan 12 Jan 18
-38% Cost reduction
+8% Success rate improvement
-22% Avg latency reduction

Spend by Outcome Type

cs.resolve
$1,802
code.review
$1,204
legal.review
$820
medical.scribe
$186

Outcome Results

Completed
1,644
Escalated
148
Failed
55

Recent Outcomes

ID Type Status Cost Latency Time
out_a1b2c3 cs.resolve Completed $0.42 23s 2 min ago
out_d4e5f6 cs.resolve Completed $0.51 45s 5 min ago
out_g7h8i9 code.review Completed $1.50 8 min 7 min ago
out_j0k1l2 cs.resolve Escalated $0.15 89s 12 min ago
out_m3n4o5 cs.resolve Completed $0.38 31s 15 min ago
2,341 Total Outcomes
$11,204 Total Spend
93.7% Success Rate
3 Claims Filed
ID Type Description Status Cost Duration Claim Date
out_x9y8z7 code.review PR #1234 - Add user authentication Completed $1.50 8 min - Jan 18, 10:23 AM
out_a1b2c3 legal.review Acme Corp - Vendor NDA Completed $12.00 15 min - Jan 18, 9:45 AM
out_d4e5f6 cs.resolve Order #5678 - Shipping inquiry Escalated $0.22 3 min - Jan 18, 9:12 AM
out_g7h8i9 legal.draft_msa TechCorp - Services Agreement ($500K deal) Claim Filed $185.00 22 min CLM-001 ($2,500) Jan 15, 2:30 PM
out_j0k1l2 medical.scribe Patient encounter - Dr. Smith Completed $2.50 Real-time - Jan 15, 11:00 AM
out_m3n4o5 code.fix Bug #892 - Login timeout issue Completed $4.20 35 min - Jan 14, 4:15 PM
out_p6q7r8 code.review PR #1198 - Payment processing (critical path) Claim Filed $45.00 12 min CLM-002 ($850) Jan 12, 10:30 AM
out_s9t0u1 cs.resolve Refund request - Order #4521 Completed $0.45 2 min - Jan 12, 9:00 AM
out_v2w3x4 legal.summarize Globex - Partnership Agreement Completed $5.00 6 min - Jan 11, 3:45 PM
out_y5z6a7 legal.draft_nda Initech - Mutual NDA (IP-sensitive) Claim Filed $65.00 10 min CLM-003 ($1,200) Jan 8, 11:20 AM

Outcomes Protocol

A platform for buying affordable AI labor.

In the platform you:

  • Define the work — resolve a ticket, review a PR, draft a contract
  • Set your price — bid strategies let you express willingness-to-pay
  • Get the outcome — verified by you or backed by a guarantee

How verification works depends on who can judge the result: you either observe success directly, or pay on delivery with guaranteed coverage for defects discovered later.

The protocol supports two verification models:

  • Deferrable outcomes — Work that can escalate to a human on your team if the AI can't complete it (customer service, triage, routing)
  • Guaranteed outcomes — Expert work backed by financialized guarantees with claim windows (legal drafts, code reviews, medical scribing)
Why this works: Like Meta Advantage+ and Google Performance Max, the marketplace lets you express willingness-to-pay via bid strategies without revealing true outcome value. Conversion feedback improves delivery optimization over time — lower costs compensate you for sharing the data.

How it works

Instead of paying per API call or negotiating custom deals:

  • Define what you want — Select from standardized outcome types (resolve a ticket, review code, draft a contract)
  • Set your price — Use bid strategies like cost caps and Return on Agent Spend (ROAS) targets
  • Get guarantees — Outcomes are verified via conversion signals or backed by guarantee contracts
  • Optimize over time — Conversion feedback improves success rates, reduces cost and latency, and learns when to escalate early
Try the prototype: Use the Catalog to explore outcome types and configure a request.

The Problem

Current AI deployment faces several challenges that the Outcomes Protocol addresses:

Problem Current Approach Protocol Solution
Information asymmetry Buyers must reveal outcome value Buyers express WTP through bid caps
Price formation Bespoke negotiation Systematic auction/bidding mechanics
No feedback loop One-time pricing Conversions API enables optimization
Non-scalable Per-customer deals Standardized outcomes create liquidity
Risk absorption Providers self-insure Risk market hooks enable trading
Latency ambiguity Implicit expectations Explicit delivery constraints
Failure handling Ad-hoc escalation Standardized handoff protocol

Comparison to Current Approaches

vs. Vertical AI Companies (Harvey, Intercom)

  • Current: Each company builds trust, pricing, guarantees independently
  • Protocol: Standardized outcomes enable marketplace dynamics, risk trading

vs. API Pricing (Per-token)

  • Current: Buyer bears all outcome risk, no guarantees
  • Protocol: Outcome-based with configurable guarantees and escalation

vs. Manual Warranties (Intercom $1M Guarantee)

  • Current: Bespoke pricing, company-specific
  • Protocol: Market-based risk pricing, portable across providers

Outcome Types

Like Meta's campaign objectives, the protocol defines standardized outcome types. This enables price comparability, market liquidity, and success criteria standardization.

Customer Service

cs.resolve

Single outcome type — customer service is reactive, you don't know what the customer will need until they ask.

Code

code.review
code.fix

Review PRs for bugs, style, and security issues. Diagnose and fix reported bugs.

Legal

legal.review
legal.summarize
legal.compare
legal.draft_nda
legal.draft_msa
legal.draft_dpa

Contract review, summarization, comparison, and drafting. All legal outcomes are guarantee-backed.

Medical

medical.scribe

Clinical documentation from patient encounters. Real-time scribing with guarantee coverage for documentation accuracy.

Verification Models

Outcomes use one of two verification models based on whether success can be objectively measured:

📊 cAPI-Verified

Success is measured via Conversions API signals based on observable events.

  • Signals: Ticket closed, no reopen within 24h, no escalation, CSAT score
  • Payment: Pay on verified success
  • Example: cs.resolve

🛡️ Guarantee-Backed

Quality requires expertise to verify. Assurance comes from a guarantee contract.

  • Flow: Agent affirms completion → you pay on delivery → file claims if defects found
  • Claim window: 30-90 days depending on outcome type
  • Backed by: The execution engine vendor (in v1). The risk market layer enables third-party underwriting later.
  • Examples: code.*, legal.*, medical.scribe

When to Use Which?

Two factors determine the right model: visibility (can you observe signals?) and expertise (can you evaluate quality?).

Visibility
Can you observe success/failure signals within your verification window?
e.g., ticket reopened, test failed, customer complained
NO
Guarantee-backed
Outcome won't be apparent for months/years, or signals aren't observable. You need claim recourse.
e.g., "Will this contract hold up in court?"
YES
Expertise
Do you have the expertise to evaluate what you observe?
Can you judge quality, or do you need a domain expert?
NO
Guarantee-backed
You can see the output but can't judge if it's correct. File claims when experts find defects.
e.g., "Is this NDA legally sound?"
YES
cAPI-verified
You can observe outcomes and judge quality. Report success/failure via Conversions API.
e.g., "Did the customer's issue get resolved?"

Bid Strategies

Mapped from advertising concepts to outcome pricing:

Meta Concept Outcomes Equivalent Description
Highest volume Maximize throughput Get most outcomes within budget
Cost cap Target cost Average cost target per outcome
Bid cap Max outcome price Never pay more than $X per outcome
ROAS goal Return on Agent Spend Target value-to-cost ratio (requires buyer-provided outcome_value)

How It Works

You set your bid strategy, and execution engines compete to deliver outcomes within your constraints. The system optimizes over time based on Conversions API feedback.

Example: With a $0.50 cost cap for cs.resolve, you'll average $0.50 per resolved ticket. Some may cost $0.30, others $0.70, but the system optimizes to hit your target.

Conversions API (cAPI)

A server-side feedback mechanism following Meta's Server-Side Events model:

  • Outcome verification signals — Report success/failure based on observable events
  • Guarantee claim processing — File claims when defects are discovered
  • Provider scoring — Track execution engine performance
  • Cost optimization — System learns from successful outcomes and claim-free deliveries

Event Types

{
  "event_type": "outcome.success",
  "event_time": "2025-01-18T10:30:00Z",
  "outcome_request_id": "out_123abc",
  "success_criteria_results": {
    "resolution_confirmed": true,
    "customer_satisfaction": 5,
    "no_reopen_24h": true
  }
}
{
  "event_type": "guarantee.claim",
  "outcome_request_id": "out_456def",
  "claim": {
    "type": "documentation_error",
    "description": "Incorrect dosage documented",
    "evidence": "...",
    "requested_amount": 500.00
  }
}

System Architecture

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                      RISK MARKET LAYER                          │
│        (Future: Outcomes Contracts, Risk Pricing)               │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                    OUTCOMES MARKETPLACE                          │
│  ┌──────────────┐    ┌──────────────┐    ┌──────────────┐       │
│  │   Outcome    │    │  Bid/Budget  │    │  Delivery    │       │
│  │   Catalog    │ →  │   Engine     │ →  │  Optimizer   │       │
│  │  (Taxonomy)  │    │  (Auction)   │    │  (Learning)  │       │
│  └──────────────┘    └──────────────┘    └──────────────┘       │
│                            ↑                                     │
│  ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐       │
│  │              Conversions API (cAPI)                   │       │
│  └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘       │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                    EXECUTION ENGINES                             │
│  ┌──────────────┐  ┌──────────────┐  ┌──────────────┐           │
│  │ Claude Code  │  │   GPT-5 +    │  │   Gemini +   │           │
│  │  (Anthropic) │  │    Devin     │  │  Custom MCP  │           │
│  └──────────────┘  └──────────────┘  └──────────────┘           │
│                                                                  │
│  Models + harnesses bid directly on outcomes                    │
│  (Human fallback available for escalation)                      │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Key Components

  • Outcome Catalog: Standardized taxonomy of outcome types
  • Bid/Budget Engine: Auction mechanics for price discovery
  • Delivery Optimizer: Learns from cAPI feedback to improve over time
  • Execution Engines: Model + harness combinations that bid on outcomes
  • Risk Market Layer: Future extension for tradeable outcome contracts

Model-Level Bidding

The protocol uses model-level bidding rather than AI application companies (Harvey, Intercom, etc.).

Why?

  • Provider companies are often thin wrappers around model APIs
  • Direct model bidding removes unnecessary intermediary layers
  • Model vendors can vertically integrate outcomes into their SDKs
  • Cleaner market dynamics: models compete on capability, not brand

Execution Engine = Model + Harness

  • Model: The AI model (Claude, GPT-5, Gemini, etc.)
  • Harness: Tooling layer (Claude Code, Devin, custom MCP servers)

Together they form an "execution engine" that can bid on outcomes.

Execution Preferences

Buyers can constrain which engines handle their requests:

{
  "execution_preferences": {
    "allowed_engines": ["claude-code", "gpt-5-devin"],
    "blocked_engines": ["experimental-*"],
    "preferred_engine": "claude-code",
    "capability_requirements": ["code_execution"]
  }
}

SDK Integration

The Outcomes Protocol extends the Claude Agent SDK. Your dashboard configuration encapsulates everything — tools, constraints, system prompt — so your code stays simple.

Setup

Initialize the client with your config ID. Integration credentials are configured in the dashboard (Context Sources):

from outcomes_protocol import OutcomesClient

# Config from dashboard includes everything:
# tools, constraints, bid strategy, system prompt, integration credentials
client = OutcomesClient("cfg_7kx9m2nq")

Running an Outcome

Pass the prompt — the client handles MCP servers, allowed tools, and system prompt from your config:

# Customer sends: "Where is my order?"
async def handle_customer_message(customer_id: str, message: str):
    async for event in client.run(f"Customer {customer_id} says: {message}"):
        if event.type == "assistant":
            yield event.content  # Stream response to customer

        if event.type == "complete":
            return event.session_id  # For conversion reporting later

Under the hood, the client calls the Claude Agent SDK with your configured MCP server (CRM, orders tools), allowed tools, constraints, and escalation triggers.

Multi-Turn Conversations

For ongoing conversations, use a session to maintain state:

async def customer_service_session(customer_id: str, first_message: str):
    async with client.session() as session:
        # First message
        async for event in session.run(f"Customer {customer_id}: {first_message}"):
            yield event

        # Follow-up messages
        while session.status == "active":
            next_message = await get_next_customer_message()
            async for event in session.run(next_message):
                yield event

        # Session ends when agent resolves or escalates
        return session.id

Reporting Conversions

For cAPI-verified outcomes, report what you observe after the fact:

# Called when you observe the real-world outcome
# e.g., ticket stayed closed for 24h, or customer reopened it
await client.report_conversion(
    session_id="sess_abc123",
    success=True,
    outcome_value=15.00  # Optional: for ROAS optimization
)
What the config provides: The dashboard configuration encapsulates everything the Claude Agent SDK needs — MCP server setup, allowed tools, system prompt with constraints and escalation triggers, and hooks for metrics tracking. Your code just calls client.run().

Customer Service

cs.resolve
📊 cAPI-Verified

Resolve customer inquiries end-to-end with AI-powered assistance.

Success Criteria

  • Resolution confirmed by customer or agent
  • No ticket reopen within 24 hours
  • No escalation to human
  • Customer satisfaction score ≥ threshold

Typical Pricing

$0.15 - $0.75 per resolved inquiry, depending on complexity and success rate requirements.

Escalation

Configurable triggers for human handoff: confidence threshold, explicit customer request, timeout, or sensitive topics. Escalated outcomes aren't billed—you only pay for successful AI resolutions.

Code

code.review
code.fix
🛡️ Guarantee-Backed

Review PRs and fix bugs with guaranteed quality.

code.review

  • Review for bugs, security issues, style violations
  • Provide actionable feedback
  • Pricing: $0.50 - $5.00 per PR
  • Claim window: 30 days

code.fix

  • Diagnose and fix reported bugs
  • Includes tests to prevent regression
  • Pricing: $2.00 - $25.00 per fix
  • Claim window: 30 days

Guarantee Coverage

Covers: missed bugs, introduced regressions, security vulnerabilities, incomplete fixes. Does not cover: requirements changes, environmental issues, pre-existing bugs.

Medical Scribing

medical.scribe
🛡️ Guarantee-Backed

Generate clinical documentation from patient encounters in real-time.

Why Guarantee-Backed?

  • Accuracy requires clinical expertise: Only a clinician can verify clinical facts.
  • Errors surface in audits: Documentation issues may appear during billing audits or care transitions.
  • Patient safety: Wrong medication or dosage documentation could cause harm.

Guarantee Coverage

  • Factual documentation errors (wrong medication, dosage, clinical fact)
  • Critical omissions (material information not documented)
  • Misattribution (statement attributed to wrong party)
  • Coding errors (incorrect codes affecting reimbursement)

Not Covered

  • Clinical judgment errors
  • Downstream treatment decisions
  • Patient harm from treatment (not documentation)
  • Malpractice claims

Pricing & Timing

  • $1.00 - $8.00 per encounter
  • Real-time delivery during or immediately after encounter
  • 90-day claim window