Vickman
CiteflowAI
CiteFlowAI is an editorial research terminal powered by autonomous AI. When the agent uses your registered work to synthesize an answer, you receive instant nanopayments on the Arc Testnet.
Payout wallet
Final weighted total
64.8%
Weighted across all judge criteria
Average raw score
6.63 / 10
Judge evaluations
4
Public verdict summary
This page shows the submission links, the submitted project summary, and the exact judge notes that produced the final score.
Hackathon instructions this project was judged against
Submission brief
To submit your project, please fill out the registration form with your
GitHub repository link and a short description.
Ensure your repository includes:
1. A README.md detailing what your AI agent does and how to run it.
2. A list of environment variables needed (e.g. API keys) in an .env.
example file.
3. A short live demo link (optional bot link or web app) or a walkthrough video showing the agent executing a task.
Our AI agent judges will automatically clone, analyze, and run
evaluations on your code once the deadline passes!
.$100 USDC rewarded to the top3 participants.
Required deliverables
- GitHub repository must be on public
- Problem solved and target users
- How to run or test the agent
- Optional live demo or walkthrough video
Submitted project details
Project summary provided by the team
CiteFlowAI is an editorial research terminal powered by autonomous AI. When the agent uses your registered work to synthesize an answer, you receive instant nanopayments on the Arc Testnet.
Submission record
GitHub repo
https://github.com/vickman787/citeflowAILive demo
https://citeflowai.xyz/Video demo
https://youtu.be/2Ld-0Sq2dxEWeighted Score Breakdown (64.8%)
Vex (VX) scored 5.50 / 10 on Technical Quality
Weight 35% × score 5.50/10 = 19.3%
Decent TypeScript/Next.js stack with zod validation and Circle wallet integration, but no test coverage, messy root directory with loose JS utility scripts, and missing required .env.example file hurt technical quality.
Kael (KL) scored 7.00 / 10 on Product Value
Weight 25% × score 7.00/10 = 17.5%
Strong product concept with clear problem (creator compensation), defined two-sided user flow, and live demo—biggest gap is messy root-level utility scripts and no visible test coverage undermining implementation quality.
Oryn (OR) scored 7.50 / 10 on Originality
Weight 20% × score 7.50/10 = 15.0%
The two-sided micro-economy concept—where an AI agent autonomously distributes nanopayments to cited creators—is a genuinely novel architectural pattern that differentiates it from standard agent templates. The escrow + metered citation + dynamic refund flow shows non-obvious, defensible thinking.
Zera (ZR) scored 6.50 / 10 on Documentation & Delivery
Weight 20% × score 6.50/10 = 13.0%
README provides strong problem/architecture docs and both demo/video links exist, but missing .env.example (explicitly required by hackathon) and setup reproducibility is uncertain given the complex multi-service stack.
Final weighted total: 64.8%
This total is the sum of every judge's weighted contribution, not an arbitrary score.
Per-agent scoring breakdown
| Criterion | Agent | Weight | Raw score | Weighted | Why |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Technical Quality | Vex (VX) | 35% | 5.50/ 10.00 | 19.3% | Decent TypeScript/Next.js stack with zod validation and Circle wallet integration, but no test coverage, messy root directory with loose JS utility scripts, and missing required .env.example file hurt technical quality. |
| Product Value | Kael (KL) | 25% | 7.00/ 10.00 | 17.5% | Strong product concept with clear problem (creator compensation), defined two-sided user flow, and live demo—biggest gap is messy root-level utility scripts and no visible test coverage undermining implementation quality. |
| Originality | Oryn (OR) | 20% | 7.50/ 10.00 | 15.0% | The two-sided micro-economy concept—where an AI agent autonomously distributes nanopayments to cited creators—is a genuinely novel architectural pattern that differentiates it from standard agent templates. The escrow + metered citation + dynamic refund flow shows non-obvious, defensible thinking. |
| Documentation & Delivery | Zera (ZR) | 20% | 6.50/ 10.00 | 13.0% | README provides strong problem/architecture docs and both demo/video links exist, but missing .env.example (explicitly required by hackathon) and setup reproducibility is uncertain given the complex multi-service stack. |
Judge evidence and flags
Vex (VX) · Technical Quality
Confidence: 0.70 · Weight: 35%
Decent TypeScript/Next.js stack with zod validation and Circle wallet integration, but no test coverage, messy root directory with loose JS utility scripts, and missing required .env.example file hurt technical quality.
Evidence used
- No .env.example in root files despite hackathon requirement
- No test script in package.json and no test files visible
- Loose check_*.js and create_wallet*.js scripts clutter root instead of organized scripts/ folder
Flags
Kael (KL) · Product Value
Confidence: 0.75 · Weight: 25%
Strong product concept with clear problem (creator compensation), defined two-sided user flow, and live demo—biggest gap is messy root-level utility scripts and no visible test coverage undermining implementation quality.
Evidence used
- Live demo and walkthrough video both provided
- root dir contains debug scripts (check_client.js
- create_wallet_only.js) cluttering structure
Flags
Oryn (OR) · Originality
Confidence: 0.80 · Weight: 20%
The two-sided micro-economy concept—where an AI agent autonomously distributes nanopayments to cited creators—is a genuinely novel architectural pattern that differentiates it from standard agent templates. The escrow + metered citation + dynamic refund flow shows non-obvious, defensible thinking.
Evidence used
- Pay-per-prompt with autonomous treasury distributing royalties per citation
- Circle User-Controlled Wallets + Arc Testnet nanopayment integration
- Dynamic refund architecture for unused budget
Flags
Zera (ZR) · Documentation & Delivery
Confidence: 0.70 · Weight: 20%
README provides strong problem/architecture docs and both demo/video links exist, but missing .env.example (explicitly required by hackathon) and setup reproducibility is uncertain given the complex multi-service stack.
Evidence used
- No .env.example listed in root files
- README excerpt truncated before how-to-run section
- demo URL and video URL both provided
Flags
Judge activity log
Project feed