Mapping external AI-task receipt IDs into LLM trace/span metadata

[0xddneto]

I am exploring how AI Proof of Us receipts should map into LLM traces.

AIPOU creates signed MCP task receipts with hashes, nonce/replay checks, local collector signatures, and explicit evidence boundaries. It does not replace traces, and trace systems should not be responsible for validating AIPOU rewards.

For observability, the useful part may be a small external reference:

{
  "aipou.receipt_id": "0x...",
  "aipou.validation_status": "local | validated | claimed | rejected",
  "aipou.evidence_boundary": "https://github.com/0xddneto/AI-Proof-of-Us/blob/main/docs/evidence-boundaries.md"
}

Would this belong as span attributes, session metadata, a linked event, or an external reference? I am trying to keep raw prompts/outputs private and avoid noisy or misleading metadata.

Interoperability note:

https://github.com/0xddneto/AI-Proof-of-Us/blob/main/docs/receiptid-interoperability.md

[0xddneto]

Follow-up for observability reviewers:

AIPOU now documents tokenomics and launch transparency here: https://github.com/0xddneto/AI-Proof-of-Us/blob/main/docs/tokenomics.md

The intended trace relationship is intentionally narrow: traces should not validate rewards or token claims. They can optionally carry a receipt reference such as aipou.receipt_id, while AIPOU keeps validation and settlement separate.

Human users benefit because approved AI-work receipts can later claim rewards. Agents and platforms benefit because the receipt is portable work evidence that can be referenced without exposing raw prompts/outputs.

The simplest non-payment test path is Local Receipt Mode: https://github.com/0xddneto/AI-Proof-of-Us/tree/main/examples/local-receipt-mode

[0xddneto]

Small AIPOU update for the trace/span metadata question:

AIPOU now has settle_all_ai_rewards, so explicit user settlement can process all currently eligible pending AI-work receipts from the shared AIPOU_DATA_DIR in bounded batches. The receipt remains external to tracing: hashes, provider/model metadata, wallet authorization, nonce/replay checks, collector signature, and optional validator-approved claims.

Token display metadata is now available:

• transparent image: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/0xddneto/AI-Proof-of-Us/main/assets/token/aipou.png
• token list: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/0xddneto/AI-Proof-of-Us/main/tokenlist.json

No price/yield/liquidity/investment value or guaranteed reward is implied.

For OpenTelemetry-style traces, would aipou.receipt_id and validation/claim status belong as span attributes, linked events, external provenance links, or should traces avoid this kind of reward-adjacent metadata entirely?