Add lofty account coverage — reserved vs free-to-spend USDC - #4
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Lofty funds open orders from live balances (buys need the USDC, sells need the shares) across all open orders on a property COMBINED, and auto-cancels orders the wallet can't cover. The check is per property, not aggregate, which has two consequences a raw balance doesn't show: - Several properties' bids lean on the same USDC, so the binding reserve is the LARGEST single-property bid total — only the surplus above it is spendable. - The SUM of bids can legitimately exceed the wallet while they rest, but one fill spends cash the other properties relied on, cascading into cancellations. `coverage` computes both, checks every order against its cover (bids vs USDC, asks vs held tokens), and `--spend` simulates a purchase to report exactly which properties it would uncover. Pure `coverage()` fn with 9 unit tests over anonymized fixtures; also validated against live API payloads (real shapes parse; reserve/exposure/free matched an independent computation to the cent). Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01J7bz8aijn2Uwv1yF5rUenW
Adds a fixture contract test for the three payloads `account coverage` reads — a missing numeric would silently read as 0 and quietly corrupt the math, so the shapes are pinned rather than discovered live. The orders fixture held only cancelled buy orders, so it could not exercise the paths that matter: asks cover against held tokens, and only `active` orders consume cover at all. Added two representative active orders (one buy, one sell) alongside the captured rows, matching live shapes including `paymentCurrency: "any"` on sells, and documented it in the fixtures README. Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01J7bz8aijn2Uwv1yF5rUenW
piekstra-dev
left a comment
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Automated PR Review
Reviewed commit: 5269bba242db
Profile: reviewer - Posting as: piekstra-dev
Summary
| Reviewer | Findings |
|---|---|
| policies:conventions | 0 |
| documentation:docs | 0 |
Reviewer Coverage
| Reviewer | Status | Inspected | Skipped | Constraints |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| policies:conventions | complete_broad | README.md, src/commands/account.rs | unavailable | No .codereview/agents/ repo-local guidance and no ../cli-common/../.github sibling docs were present, so review relied on this repo's own AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.md conventions plus the code itself. |
| documentation:docs | complete_broad | README.md, tests/fixtures/README.md | unavailable | unavailable |
| unassigned | incomplete_unassigned | unavailable | tests/fixture_shapes.rs, tests/fixtures/account/orders-list.json | changed files were not assigned to a selected reviewer |
0 PR discussion threads considered. 0 summarized; 0 resolved.
Completed in 1m 56s | $1.33 | claude-sonnet-5 | cr 0.10.268
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Model | claude-sonnet-5 |
| Reviewers | policies:conventions, documentation:docs |
| Engine | claude_cli · claude-sonnet-5 |
| Reviewed by | cr · piekstra-dev |
| Duration | 1m 56s wall · 2m 49s compute |
| Cost | $1.33 |
| Tokens | 66 in / 10.5k out |
Per-workstream usage
| Workstream | Model | In | Out | Cache read | Cache create | Cost | Duration |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| orchestrator-selection | claude-sonnet-5 | 6 | 2.0k | 27.0k | 31.0k | $0.22 | 24s |
| policies:conventions | claude-sonnet-5 | 32 | 4.6k | 499.0k | 48.5k | $0.51 | 1m 21s |
| documentation:docs | claude-sonnet-5 | 22 | 3.5k | 377.0k | 51.1k | $0.47 | 55s |
| orchestrator-rollup | claude-sonnet-5 | 6 | 339 | 60.4k | 16.3k | $0.12 | 8s |
piekstra
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 28, 2026
Three read-only commands for the questions the raw API can't answer directly, plus one fee correctness fix: - `account coverage` — USDC reserved backing bids vs free to spend (#4) - `account breakeven` — fee-inclusive sell price; costBasis hides the buy fee (#5) - `rewards eligibility`— are my orders earning right now, and if not why (#6) - fix: AMM rates are platform + the pool's LP fee (#7) All three verified against a live account before release. Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01J7bz8aijn2Uwv1yF5rUenW
piekstra
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 30, 2026
* Add lofty account coverage — reserved vs free-to-spend USDC Lofty funds open orders from live balances (buys need the USDC, sells need the shares) across all open orders on a property COMBINED, and auto-cancels orders the wallet can't cover. The check is per property, not aggregate, which has two consequences a raw balance doesn't show: - Several properties' bids lean on the same USDC, so the binding reserve is the LARGEST single-property bid total — only the surplus above it is spendable. - The SUM of bids can legitimately exceed the wallet while they rest, but one fill spends cash the other properties relied on, cascading into cancellations. `coverage` computes both, checks every order against its cover (bids vs USDC, asks vs held tokens), and `--spend` simulates a purchase to report exactly which properties it would uncover. Pure `coverage()` fn with 9 unit tests over anonymized fixtures; also validated against live API payloads (real shapes parse; reserve/exposure/free matched an independent computation to the cent). * Pin coverage's API-shape contract; fill an orders-fixture gap Adds a fixture contract test for the three payloads `account coverage` reads — a missing numeric would silently read as 0 and quietly corrupt the math, so the shapes are pinned rather than discovered live. The orders fixture held only cancelled buy orders, so it could not exercise the paths that matter: asks cover against held tokens, and only `active` orders consume cover at all. Added two representative active orders (one buy, one sell) alongside the captured rows, matching live shapes including `paymentCurrency: "any"` on sells, and documented it in the fixtures README.
piekstra
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 30, 2026
Three read-only commands for the questions the raw API can't answer directly, plus one fee correctness fix: - `account coverage` — USDC reserved backing bids vs free to spend (#4) - `account breakeven` — fee-inclusive sell price; costBasis hides the buy fee (#5) - `rewards eligibility`— are my orders earning right now, and if not why (#6) - fix: AMM rates are platform + the pool's LP fee (#7) All three verified against a live account before release.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What
Adds
lofty account coverage: how much of your USDC is reserved backing resting bids vs actually free to spend, plus a per-order coverage check and a--spendsimulation.Why
Lofty funds open orders from your live balances — buys need the USDC, sells need the shares, for as long as the order is open, across all your open orders on a property combined — and orders your wallet can't cover are canceled automatically.
That check is per property, not aggregate, which has two consequences your raw balance won't tell you:
overCommitted) — but one fill spends cash the other properties were also counting on, cascading into automatic cancellations.Spending USDC on new inventory is exactly how you accidentally trip #2.
--spendsimulates it and names the properties it would uncover, before you spend.Usage
--jsonemitsaccount-coverage/v1:walletUsdc,reservedUsdc,freeUsdc,bidExposureUsdc,overCommitted,uncoveredBids/uncoveredAsks, aproperties[]breakdown, andsimulationwhen--spendis given.Notes
Testing
coverage()is a pure function with 9 unit tests over anonymized fixtures, covering the max-not-sum reserve, same-property combining, uncovered bids, asks-vs-held-tokens, non-active orders ignored, the spend cascade, and the empty account.cargo fmt --check,cargo clippy --all-targets -D warnings, andcargo testall clean.