# Where This Goes

The wedge is shipped and provable today. The vision is what a shared route graph becomes once many agents depend on it. This page is deliberately explicit about both, and about the line between them.

## The wedge (shipped, stands alone)

Shared route lookup beats browser rediscovery on cost, latency, and reliability. A rational agent prefers shared execution whenever the route fee stays below the expected cost of rediscovery. That inequality is enough to make the graph create real surplus, and it needs no token, no network economics, and no vision to be true. Everything below is layered on a thing that already works.

## The direction (where a maintained graph leads)

As agent traffic concentrates on the graph, three things compound:

1. **Coverage and freshness.** Every reused route makes the next agent's task cheaper; every piece of feedback makes the graph more trustworthy. Usage and quality reinforce each other.
2. **A maintenance network.** A graph carrying meaningful traffic needs accountable maintainers, challengeable claims, and trust tiers, not just access payments. This is the [Concepts](/concepts/the-maintenance-network.md) layer: open routes for low-risk traffic, higher-trust routes for authenticated and high-value paths, ranking grounded in route quality rather than capital.
3. **A security-layer coordination asset, only if earned.** Stable settlement handles ordinary usage. A native asset (FDRY) is reserved for the distinct problem of supply-side accountability in higher-trust maintenance, and only if and when the graph matures enough to need it. See [Accountable Bonding and Where FDRY Fits](/concepts/accountable-bonding.md).

## The discipline

The sequencing is the point: prove the wedge, then strengthen maintenance, then optional accountable bonding only if higher-trust maintenance becomes important enough to justify it. The vision does not get to skip the wedge, and the user never has to hold an asset or think in token units to use Unbrowse. A graph that can solve redundant discovery with no native asset at all is a feature, not a flaw, because the product proves itself directly in the market before any of the coordination machinery is asked to exist.

The honest split, for anyone reading this for diligence: the wedge is measurable now; the maintenance network and the narrow role of a coordination asset are documented direction in the [papers](/for-investors/read-the-papers.md), not claims of current revenue mechanics. A fuller Maintenance Network paper is being prepared for release. The coordination asset is disclosed neutrally at [FDRY Token Disclosure](/reference/fdry.md), and the verification posture behind trust claims is described in [Verification and Proofs](/concepts/verification-and-proofs.md).


---

# Agent Instructions: Querying This Documentation

If you need additional information that is not directly available in this page, you can query the documentation dynamically by asking a question.

Perform an HTTP GET request on the current page URL with the `ask` query parameter:

```
GET https://docs.unbrowse.ai/vision.md?ask=<question>
```

The question should be specific, self-contained, and written in natural language.
The response will contain a direct answer to the question and relevant excerpts and sources from the documentation.

Use this mechanism when the answer is not explicitly present in the current page, you need clarification or additional context, or you want to retrieve related documentation sections.