Skip to main content

import {DocCards, DocCard} from '@site/src/components/docs/DocCards'; import {DocFeatures, DocFeature} from '@site/src/components/docs/DocFeatures';

Protocol overview

OMY is an optimistic oracle: a mechanism where any address can claim a fact on-chain, anyone can challenge it within a window, and economic incentives make honest reporting the only rational strategy. It is the truth layer for prediction markets, bridges, insurance, RWA, and any other consumer that needs an answer to "did this happen?".

This page is the conceptual map. If you're here to integrate, jump to SDK → Quick Start. If you're here to understand the mechanism, keep reading.

The problem oracles solve​

A smart contract on TON is deterministic but isolated. It can do arithmetic on its own state, accept and send messages, hold balances. What it cannot do is look outside the chain.

Did Trump win the 2028 election? Did the bridge transaction confirm on chain X? Did the insured flight depart on time? Did the audit firm sign off on milestone M3?

Every consumer contract that wants to settle on real-world facts needs some trusted process to deliver those facts on-chain. That process is the oracle.

The hard part: who do you trust to report the truth, and how do you make sure they don't lie?

Two oracle models​

There are two answers in production today:

import styles from '@site/src/components/docs/Compare.module.css';

Pessimistic / signed

A committee signs every data point. A relayer pushes signatures on-chain on every refresh. The chain verifies.

  • ✓ Sub-second freshness
  • ✓ Low marginal cost per query
  • ✗ Pays signing cost on every update — even when nobody cares
  • ✗ Hard to extend to arbitrary facts (only what the committee chose)
Fits: prices, rates, indices
Optimistic (this protocol)

Anyone can assert a fact + post a bond. The fact is accepted unless challenged within a window. Disputes escalate to an arbitration layer.

  • ✓ Almost free in the common case (no dispute)
  • ✓ Resolves arbitrary facts, not just numbers
  • ✓ Pays settlement cost only when something is contested
  • ✗ Slower (liveness window — minutes to hours)
Fits: events, settlements, attestations

OMY is the second category, native to TON.

Mechanism​

The full mechanism in one paragraph:

A consumer asks a yes/no question. An asserter posts a USDT bond and proposes an answer. A liveness window opens. If nobody disputes within the window, the answer is accepted as truth and delivered to the consumer. If someone disputes (also posting a bond), the question escalates to a resolver — a trusted committee at launch, stake-weighted commit-reveal voting once $OMY launches. The resolver picks a winner. The loser's bond splits 50/50 between the winner and the protocol treasury. Lying loses money in expectation.

The four roles in the mechanism:

Your contract. Asks a question by sending CreateAssertion to the OracleFactory. Receives OracleResult when the answer finalizes. Anyone. Posts bondAmount + protocolFee in USDT, claims an answer. Bond is refunded if the answer stands. Anyone with conviction the proposer is wrong. Posts a matching bond to challenge. Watcher bots fill this role for high-stakes assertions. Phase 1 — committee multisig. Phase 2 — stake-weighted DVM voting in $OMY. Settles disputed assertions.

Why economic incentives work​

The core insight, sometimes called the Schelling point argument:

Honest reporting is rational because every actor expects every other actor to report honestly, the bond mechanism makes lying loss-making in expectation, and the dispute path makes manipulating the outcome more expensive than the profit available from doing so.

This relies on three properties holding together:

  1. The bond is large enough that lying costs more than the profit from steering the outcome. OMY's reference Market sizes bonds at 2% of TVL, floored and capped.
  2. The resolver is honest in aggregate. Phase 1 uses a curated committee. Phase 2 uses stake-weighted voting where attacking requires buying enough $OMY that the attack is both expensive AND self-defeating (the token's value crashes when it gets attacked).
  3. The question is unambiguous. This is the non-mechanical requirement — the part that breaks in practice when not handled carefully. See Question templates.

Contracts at a glance​

 ┌───────────────────┐
 consumer ─────► │ OracleFactory │ ──spawn──► Assertion (one per question)
 └─────────┬─────────┘ │
 │ │
 │ injects │ on dispute:
 │ monetization ▼
 │ snapshot ┌──────────────┐
 ▼ │ Resolver │
 │ │
 │ Phase 1 → │
 │ Committee │
 │ multisig │
 │ │
 │ Phase 2 → │
 │ $OMY-staked │
 │ DVM voting │
 └──────────────┘
  • OracleFactory — single entry point for spawning assertions. Holds the bond-jetton master, the wallet-discovery TEP-89 plumbing, and the monetization snapshot.
  • Assertion — one contract per question. Holds question metadata, bond amounts, status, and final answer.
  • CommitteeResolver (Phase 1) — M-of-N multisig of trusted signers.
  • StakeVoteResolver / DVM (Phase 2) — $OMY stake-weighted commit-reveal voting.

For the architectural deep-dive: Architecture.

What you can build​

Where to go next​