Automated strategies fail silently on gas spikes, leaving positions undefended with no notification.
Pillar: Autonomy
The problem
Keeper networks and automated strategies depend on gas being available and affordable at execution time. During network congestion, transactions fail or are not submitted. The user’s strategy does not execute. The user may not find out until the damage is done.
There is no standard for fallback execution, retrying with higher gas, or notifying the user when automation fails.
Why it matters
- Autonomy: My strategy only works in benign conditions — exactly when it matters least.
- Safety: Liquidation protection strategies fail precisely during the high-volatility periods when they’re needed.
What exists today
EIP-1559 improved gas predictability. Keeper networks have internal retry logic. No user-facing standard for automation failure disclosure.
The gap
No standard for automation failure notification and fallback execution paths.
Open questions
- What’s the right gas budget model for time-sensitive automations?
- Should automation contracts hold gas reserves?