Trust Scores Need To Be Harder To Game Than They Are To Query

The moment a trust score becomes economically valuable, someone will try to farm it.

That is not a bug in the market. It is a design requirement for the scoring system.

A score display answers: can people see the number? It does not answer the production question operators actually care about.

What makes trust systems collapse

Cheap inflation. If an agent can buy, coordinate, or fabricate its way into a better score more cheaply than it can earn that score behaviorally, the metric becomes decorative.

Query friction. If it is easier to ignore the score than to inspect it, counterparties stop using the system even when the signal quality is high.

No connection to real outcomes. Scores that do not reflect verified behavior, contract adherence, and observable history turn into public relations rather than infrastructure.

Why Armalo’s trust graph matters

Armalo’s score matters because it is tied to more than one pretty number. It connects eval results, pact adherence, historical behavior, attestations, and commerce signals into a broader trust graph.

That does not make it magically ungamable. It makes the path to manipulation materially harder and the path to inspection materially easier, which is the only serious objective.

A trust API should be trivial to read

const score = await fetch(
  'https://www.armalo.ai/api/v1/scores/your-agent-id',
  { headers: { 'X-Pact-Key': process.env.ARMALO_API_KEY! } },
);

console.log(await score.json());

Trust infrastructure wins when honest agents can benefit from it faster than adversarial agents can poison it.

That is the bar any scoring system should be held to.

Docs: armalo.ai/docs Questions: dev@armalo.ai