feat: user-facing erc20_overrides for RunNodeImmediately (+ simulation-state fix & RPC E2E proof) by chrisli30 · Pull Request #624 · AvaProtocol/EigenLayer-AVS

chrisli30 · 2026-06-23T22:13:52Z

Continues #620 (by @Antrikshgwal) and gets its E2E coverage green. Based on that branch, with two additions: the missing wiring fix that makes erc20_overrides actually work through the RPC path, and a decisive end-to-end test that proves it.

What #620 was missing

@Antrikshgwal wired erc20_overrides from the request → proto → RunNodeImmediately → SimulationStateMap. Driving that path for real (not via a direct ApplyUserERC20Override call, per @will-dz's review) surfaced a bug the helper-only tests couldn't: the overrides never reached Tenderly.

VM.RunNodeWithInputs builds a fresh tempVM for isolated single-node execution but never copied the parent VM's simulationState. The seeded balances/allowances were applied to the parent VM and then dropped — so the contractWrite node simulated against empty state and the Uniswap swap still reverted with ERC20: transfer amount exceeds allowance. That's why the feature couldn't be shown green.

Fix: propagate v.simulationState into tempVM (core/taskengine/vm.go). When simulation state is unset this is nil (unchanged); when set-but-empty the Tenderly client still takes its default state_objects path, so existing tests are unaffected.

The E2E test (addresses the review checklist)

TestRunNodeImmediatelyRPC/ERC20Overrides_UniswapSwap now drives the real RunNodeImmediatelyRPC entrypoint with a populated erc20_overrides on a Uniswap exactInputSingle contractWrite node, and asserts a true before/after:

control (no overrides) reverts on the allowance/balance precondition, and
the same swap succeeds once overrides seed USDC balance (slot 9) + SwapRouter02 allowance (slot 10).

Only balance/allowance flowing from the request all the way into the Tenderly simulation can flip that outcome. Slots 9/10 were confirmed empirically against the deployed Sepolia USDC (Circle FiatToken).

Local verification (real Tenderly + funded `OWNER_EOA`)

Full core/taskengine package under go test . -short (the exact CI invocation):

Test	baseline (#620 head)	this branch
`TestRunNodeImmediatelyRPC` (incl. `ERC20Overrides_UniswapSwap`)	❌ FAIL	✅ PASS
`TestContractWriteNode_UniswapV3Quote`	✅	✅
`TestExecuteTask_UniswapApprovalAndSwap_DifferentApprovalAmounts_Sepolia`	✅	✅
`TestContractWriteTenderlySimulation`	✅	✅

The only remaining -short failure is TestBalanceNode_MissingAPIKey, which fails identically on the #620 baseline (pre-existing, unrelated to this change) and skips in CI when MORALIS_API_KEY is configured — consistent with the currently-green staging runs.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Addresses review feedback on #620. - parseUint256: reject negative values and anything exceeding uint256 max, so an override can never format into an invalid EVM storage word. - erc20SlotOrDefault: bounds-check the caller-supplied *uint64 slot before the int64 conversion, preventing a >MaxInt64 index from overflowing into a bogus storage slot. - Add a real end-to-end test as a subtest of TestRunNodeImmediatelyRPC (ERC20Overrides_UniswapSwap): builds a RunNodeWithInputsReq with populated erc20_overrides and calls the real RunNodeImmediatelyRPC on a Uniswap exactInputSingle node, asserting the sim no longer reverts on the allowance/balance precondition — exercising the full request → proto → RunNodeImmediately → SimulationStateMap → Tenderly path (not the helper directly). Skips cleanly without OWNER_EOA. - Seed balance and allowance at their OWN slots (balance 0/9, allowance 3/10) instead of reusing balance slots for allowance; keep the documented 0/3 defaults and add unit cases for the new validation. - Docs: note the value/slot bounds and the explicit-slot escape hatch for OpenZeppelin (allowance slot 1) and USDC (9/10) layouts.

…rrides reach Tenderly RunNodeWithInputs builds a fresh tempVM for isolated single-node execution but never propagated the parent VM's simulationState. Caller-seeded erc20_overrides (and any accumulated state diffs) were applied to the parent VM and then dropped, so the contractWrite node simulated against an empty state and Uniswap swaps still reverted with "transfer amount exceeds allowance/balance" despite the overrides. Propagate v.simulationState to tempVM so the seeded balances/allowances actually flow into the node's Tenderly simulation. When no simulation state is set (non-simulation paths) this is nil, unchanged from before; when set but empty the Tenderly client still takes the default state_objects path, so existing tests are unaffected.

Copilot

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 10 out of 12 changed files in this pull request and generated 5 comments.

Files not reviewed (1)

protobuf/avs.pb.go: Generated file

+	// Allowance slot value: max uint256
+	wantAllowSlot := erc20AllowanceSlot(common.HexToAddress(owner), common.HexToAddress(spender), 3).Hex()
+	assert.Equal(t, "0x"+"ff"+"ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff", storage[wantAllowSlot])
+}


+		// USDC on Sepolia is Circle's FiatToken: balanceOf at storage slot 9 and
+		// allowance at slot 10 (confirmed empirically against the deployed token).
+		maxAllowance := "0xffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff"
+		bigBalance := "0x38d7ea4c68000" // 1,000,000 USDC (6 decimals)
+		balanceOverride := &avsproto.ERC20StateOverride{


+err := vm.simulationState.ApplyUserERC20Override(
+    tokenAddress, ownerAddress, spenderAddress,
+    "0x38d7ea4c68000", // balance: 1,000,000 USDC
+    "0xffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff", // allowance: max uint256
+    balanceSlotPtr,   // *uint64, required when balance is set (e.g. USDC: 9)
+    allowanceSlotPtr, // *uint64, required when allowance is set (e.g. USDC: 10)
+)


+      tokenAddress: '0x1c7D4B196Cb0C7B01d743Fbc6116a902379C7238', // USDC
+      ownerAddress: '0x71c8f4D7D5291EdCb3A081802e7efB2788Bd232e',
+      spenderAddress: '0x3bFA4769FB09eefC5a80d6E87c3B9C650f7Ae48E', // SwapRouter02
+      balance: '0x38d7ea4c68000',  // 1,000,000 USDC (6 decimals)
+      allowance: '0xffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff', // max uint256
+      balanceSlot: 9,    // USDC FiatToken layout (required — see table below)
+      allowanceSlot: 10, // USDC FiatToken layout (required — see table below)


…ew nits Address Copilot review round 2 on PR #624: - 0x38d7ea4c68000 is 1e15 base units = 1,000,000,000 USDC at 6 decimals, not 1,000,000. Fixed the misleading comment in all five spots (engine docs, SDK example, and the two Uniswap tests). - Replaced the string-concatenated max-uint256 literal in the override unit test with the full hex literal for clarity. - Dropped the misleading "Standard ERC20 | 0 | 3" row from the storage-slot table; OpenZeppelin v4/v5 (0/1) is the de-facto standard.

chrisli30 · 2026-06-23T23:25:16Z

Round 2 addressed in 279cabb:

Magnitude comment: correct — 0x38d7ea4c68000 is 1e15 base units = 1,000,000,000 USDC at 6 decimals, not 1,000,000. Fixed the comment in all five spots (it was an oversized-on-purpose balance; only the comment was wrong).
Max-uint256 string concat: replaced with the full hex literal in the unit test.
Also dropped the misleading Standard ERC20 | 0 | 3 row from the slot table (OpenZeppelin v4/v5 0/1 is the real standard), consistent with the require-explicit-slot change.

Copilot

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 10 out of 12 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

Files not reviewed (1)

protobuf/avs.pb.go: Generated file

+  // Optional ERC20 balance/allowance state overrides applied only during this
+  // isolated node simulation (RunNodeImmediately). Lets callers seed token
+  // balances and approvals so contract-write simulations (e.g. Uniswap swaps)
+  // don't revert with "transfer amount exceeds allowance/balance" before the
+  // approval/funding transactions have been run. Ignored for real execution.
+  repeated ERC20StateOverride erc20_overrides = 5;


+          description: >
+            Optional ERC20 balance/allowance state overrides applied only during
+            this isolated node simulation. Lets callers seed token balances and
+            approvals so contract-write simulations (e.g. Uniswap swaps) don't
+            revert with "transfer amount exceeds allowance/balance" before the
+            approval/funding transactions have been run. Ignored for real execution.


Address Copilot review round 3 on PR #624: the proto and OpenAPI docs said erc20_overrides are "Ignored for real execution", but RunNodeImmediately returns an error ("erc20_overrides are only supported in simulation mode") when isSimulated=false. Corrected the proto/OpenAPI/generated docstrings to state the reject-with-error behavior so SDK/REST clients don't assume the field is silently dropped.

chrisli30 · 2026-06-23T23:31:10Z

Round 3 addressed in the latest commit: corrected the proto/OpenAPI/generated docstrings — erc20_overrides are rejected with an error when isSimulated=false (erc20_overrides are only supported in simulation mode), not silently ignored. Thanks!

Copilot

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 10 out of 12 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

Files not reviewed (1)

protobuf/avs.pb.go: Generated file

+	overrides, ok := rawOverrides.([]*avsproto.ERC20StateOverride)
+	if !ok || len(overrides) == 0 {
+		return nil
+	}


+	usdc := "0x1c7D4B196Cb0C7B01d743Fbc6116a902379C7238"
+	owner := "0x71c8f4D7D5291EdCb3A081802e7efB2788Bd232e"
+	swapRouter02 := "0x3bFA4769FB09eefC5a80d6E87c3B9C650f7Ae48E"
+	require.NotNil(t, vm.simulationState, "simulation state must exist in simulation mode")
+	bigBalance := "0x38d7ea4c68000"                                                      // 1,000,000,000 USDC (6 decimals)
+	maxAllowance := "0xffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff" // max uint256
+	// Cover both the standard OpenZeppelin ERC20 layout (balance slot 0 /
+	// allowance slot 1) and USDC's FiatToken layout (9 / 10) so the override lands
+	// regardless of which the deployed test token uses. Balance and allowance get
+	// their OWN slots.
+	for _, balSlot := range []uint64{0, 9} {
+		s := balSlot
+		require.NoError(t, vm.simulationState.ApplyUserERC20Override(
+			usdc, owner, "", bigBalance, "", &s, nil))
+	}
+	for _, allowSlot := range []uint64{1, 10} {
+		s := allowSlot
+		require.NoError(t, vm.simulationState.ApplyUserERC20Override(
+			usdc, owner, swapRouter02, "", maxAllowance, nil, &s))
+	}


…verrides from quote test Address Copilot review round 4 on PR #624: - applyERC20Overrides returned nil when the stashed value wasn't a []*ERC20StateOverride, silently dropping a caller's overrides and masking any wiring/serialization bug. Return an explicit internal error instead; the empty-slice case still no-ops. - TestContractWriteNode_UniswapV3Quote seeded a SwapRouter02 balance/allowance, but QuoterV2.quoteExactInputSingle is a view function that reverts by design to return the quote and never does a transferFrom — so those overrides validated nothing and only muddied the test. Removed them; the test now honestly covers tuple-parameter calldata generation. The erc20_overrides request path is proven end-to-end by TestRunNodeImmediatelyRPC/ERC20Overrides_UniswapSwap.

chrisli30 · 2026-06-23T23:39:49Z

Round 4 addressed in the latest commit:

Silent type-assertion drop: applyERC20Overrides now returns an explicit internal error if the stashed value isn't a []*ERC20StateOverride (it could only happen via a wiring bug), instead of silently dropping the overrides. Empty slice still no-ops.
QuoterV2 override mismatch: you're right — quoteExactInputSingle reverts by design to return the quote and never does a transferFrom, so seeding a SwapRouter02 allowance proved nothing there. Removed the override seeding; that test now honestly validates tuple-parameter calldata generation, and the override request path is proven E2E by TestRunNodeImmediatelyRPC/ERC20Overrides_UniswapSwap.

Copilot

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 10 out of 12 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

Files not reviewed (1)

protobuf/avs.pb.go: Generated file

+	abi, _ := structpb.NewValue(map[string]interface{}{
+		"inputs": []interface{}{
+			map[string]interface{}{
+				"name": "params",
+				"type": "tuple",
+				"components": []interface{}{
+					map[string]interface{}{"name": "tokenIn", "type": "address"},
+					map[string]interface{}{"name": "tokenOut", "type": "address"},
+					map[string]interface{}{"name": "fee", "type": "uint24"},
+					map[string]interface{}{"name": "recipient", "type": "address"},
+					map[string]interface{}{"name": "amountIn", "type": "uint256"},
+					map[string]interface{}{"name": "amountOutMinimum", "type": "uint256"},
+					map[string]interface{}{"name": "sqrtPriceLimitX96", "type": "uint160"},
+				},
+			},
+		},
+		"name":            "exactInputSingle",
+		"outputs":         []interface{}{map[string]interface{}{"name": "amountOut", "type": "uint256"}},
+		"stateMutability": "payable",
+		"type":            "function",
+	})
+


…ride E2E test Address Copilot review round 5 on PR #624: the erc20_overrides E2E test ignored the StoreWallet error and the structpb.NewValue error in exactInputSingleSwapNode. Assert both (require.NoError) so a seed/ABI failure fails the test deterministically instead of surfacing as a confusing downstream error.

chrisli30 · 2026-06-23T23:46:29Z

Round 5 addressed in the latest commit: the override E2E test now asserts both the StoreWallet error and the structpb.NewValue ABI-build error (require.NoError) so a seed/ABI failure fails the test deterministically rather than surfacing later as a confusing error.

Copilot

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 10 out of 12 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

Files not reviewed (1)

protobuf/avs.pb.go: Generated file

+		allowOnly := runSwap([]*avsproto.ERC20StateOverride{allowanceOverride})
+		t.Logf("allowance only     : success=%v error=%q", allowOnly.Success, allowOnly.Error)
+		require.False(t, allowOnly.Success, "swap must still fail with balance unseeded")
+		assert.NotContains(t, allowOnly.Error, "transfer amount exceeds allowance",
+			"allowance override should have seeded the approval through the RPC path")
+		assert.Contains(t, allowOnly.Error, "transfer amount exceeds balance",
+			"with approval seeded but balance unseeded, the swap must revert on balance")


…phase Address Copilot review round 6 on PR #624: the "allowance only" phase required the error to contain exactly "transfer amount exceeds balance", but SwapRouter02's transferFrom failure can surface as TransferHelper "STF" or the inner token revert depending on how Tenderly extracts it. Accept either so the balance-precondition assertion isn't brittle to revert-extraction ordering.

chrisli30 · 2026-06-23T23:53:04Z

Round 6 addressed in the latest commit: the "allowance only" phase now accepts either the inner transfer amount exceeds balance revert or TransferHelper STF, since Tenderly may surface SwapRouter02's transferFrom failure as either — removing the brittleness without weakening the proof (it still asserts the allowance was seeded and the remaining failure is the balance precondition).

chrisli30 temporarily deployed to Test June 23, 2026 22:14 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

Antrikshgwal and others added 3 commits June 23, 2026 15:17

feat: user-facing erc20_overrides for RunNodeImmediately simulations

291b3cc

chrisli30 force-pushed the feat/erc20-overrides-runnode-e2e branch from 379238d to 84c7282 Compare June 23, 2026 22:18

chrisli30 temporarily deployed to Test June 23, 2026 22:20 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

chrisli30 had a problem deploying to Test June 23, 2026 22:20 — with GitHub Actions Failure

chrisli30 temporarily deployed to Test June 23, 2026 22:20 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

chrisli30 temporarily deployed to Test June 23, 2026 23:01 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

Copilot AI reviewed Jun 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

will-dz mentioned this pull request Jun 24, 2026

feat: ERC20 allowance overrides + user-facing erc20_overrides API for RunNodeImmediately #620

Closed

This was referenced Jun 25, 2026

feat: Path B /api/notify summaries + erc20_overrides for run-node #627

Merged

feat!: per-part chain decoupling (chain_id required per trigger/node) #636

Merged

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

feat: user-facing erc20_overrides for RunNodeImmediately (+ simulation-state fix & RPC E2E proof)#624

feat: user-facing erc20_overrides for RunNodeImmediately (+ simulation-state fix & RPC E2E proof)#624
chrisli30 merged 12 commits into
stagingfrom
feat/erc20-overrides-runnode-e2e

chrisli30 commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

chrisli30 commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

chrisli30 commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

chrisli30 commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

chrisli30 commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

chrisli30 commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

Uh oh!

Conversation

chrisli30 commented Jun 23, 2026

What #620 was missing

The E2E test (addresses the review checklist)

Local verification (real Tenderly + funded OWNER_EOA)

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

chrisli30 commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

chrisli30 commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

chrisli30 commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

chrisli30 commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

chrisli30 commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

Local verification (real Tenderly + funded `OWNER_EOA`)