CiP-74 Align solver and protocol incentives

[fleupold]

Description

Proposed specification for https://forum.cow.fi/t/cip-draft-align-solver-rewards-with-protocol-revenue/3174

Changes

• Reduce upper cap for protocol fee based logic
• Specify 2bps volume based fee

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation
  • Added CIP-74 to solver rewards, clarified cap calculation wording, and simplified per-chain cap entries while retaining the primary note/dashboard as source of truth
  • Updated fee docs:
    • Surplus and quote-improvement fee caps reduced from 1.00% to 0.98% and calculations adjusted
    • Volume fee cap reduced from 10 bps to 2 bps and scope broadened to all orders
  • Removed an outdated historical testing note (CIP-34)

_{✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.}

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project	Deployment	Preview	Updated (UTC)
docs	Ready	Preview	Nov 26, 2025 1:31pm

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

This PR updates protocol docs: adds CIP-74 to solver competition rewards, clarifies cap parameter definitions (defining c_u as the protocol fee and c_l as a chain-specific cap) and simplifies per-chain cap entries; and revises governance fees — lowering surplus/quote caps from 1% to 0.98% and changing the Volume Fee from 10 bps to 2 bps while broadening its scope to all orders.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Solver Rewards Documentation docs/cow-protocol/reference/core/auctions/rewards.md	Added CIP-74 under solver competition rewards; reworded cap function to define c_u (protocol fee) and c_l (chain-specific cap); reformatted per-chain cap entries to use single bare values and removed explicit c_l/c_u label pairs for several chains; added note clarifying protocol-perspective requirements for chain-executed solutions; retained primary Dune-dashboard note.
Fee Structure Documentation docs/governance/fees/fees.md	Removed CIP-34 historical note; updated surplus-fee and quote-improvement caps from 1% → 0.98% and replaced volume * 0.01 caps with volume * 0.0098; replaced Gnosis-specific volume-fee section with a generic "Volume Fee" (cap 10 bps → 2 bps, volume * 0.001 → volume * 0.0002) and broadened scope to all orders; adjusted in-page wording and removed some stable-coin handling inline comments.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~20 minutes

• Pay attention to:
  • Numeric accuracy and consistent propagation of updated caps and formulas (0.01 → 0.0098, 0.001 → 0.0002).
  • Precise wording and placement of CIP-74 references and any links.
  • Verification that per-chain cap simplifications did not omit required values; confirm the Dune dashboard reference remains correct.

Possibly related PRs

• Update rewards.md #528 — overlaps edits to docs/.../auctions/rewards.md, including per-chain reward entries and solver/reward criteria.
• Update rewards.md #499 — related updates to solver competition rewards wording and CIP references.

Suggested reviewers

• harisang
• pretf00d

Poem

🐰
I hopped through docs both near and far,
CIP-74 twinkled like a star.
Caps trimmed neat, the fees made light,
Chains aligned, the pages bright —
A carrot for the merge tonight! 🥕

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly summarizes the main change: aligning solver and protocol incentives per CIP-74, which is directly reflected in the documentation updates.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description includes both required sections (Description and Changes) with appropriate detail. However, it lacks linked issues reference and could provide more context about the specification changes.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

✨ Finishing touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment
• Commit unit tests in branch cip74

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[fhenneke]

The changes correctly reflect the current state of the proposed CIP.

[fleupold]

Reduced price improvement fee to 0.98% of volume to leave the total maximum protocol fee capped at 1%

[pretf00d]

one tweak requested.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d0b42d4 and 65e22ff.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• docs/cow-protocol/reference/core/auctions/rewards.md (2 hunks)

🔇 Additional comments (3)

docs/cow-protocol/reference/core/auctions/rewards.md (3)

7-8: Good incorporation of CIP-74 and improved wording.

The introductory paragraph now includes CIP-74 and reflects the community feedback from previous reviews. The wording clarifies the dual nature of solver rewards (competition and price estimation) and reads more naturally.

---

15-15: Section header properly updated for CIP-74.

The header now consistently reflects the CIP-74 reference added to the introduction.

---

39-39: Clear clarification of multi-solution aggregation.

The rewording explicitly specifies that $$c_u$$ includes protocol fees from "all solutions supplied by the solver in that auction," directly resolving the ambiguity raised in previous reviews about multiple solutions from a single solver.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

docs/cow-protocol/reference/core/auctions/rewards.md (1)

19-23: Minor phrasing refinement suggested for the new protocol-execution note.

The new note appropriately clarifies that on-chain solutions must match the solver's off-chain commitment. However, the phrasing "From the protocol's perspective" is slightly informal. Consider a more direct phrasing, such as:

"A solution executed on chain must equal the solver's initial commitment" or "The protocol requires that on-chain executions match the solver's off-chain commitment."

This change would make the requirement more explicit without the anthropomorphic framing.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 65e22ff and 757d665.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• docs/cow-protocol/reference/core/auctions/rewards.md (2 hunks)

🔇 Additional comments (3)

docs/cow-protocol/reference/core/auctions/rewards.md (3)

7-8: Intro text successfully incorporates CIP-74 and prior feedback.

The reworded intro paragraph includes the CIP-74 reference and appears to reflect the suggestion from previous reviews to clarify the nature of solver rewards. The text is clear and well-structured.

---

15-15: Section header correctly updated to include CIP-74.

---

39-46: Per-chain cap formatting now consistently presented — resolves prior inconsistency.

This change successfully addresses the inconsistency flagged in previous reviews. All per-chain cap entries now use a uniform bare-value format (e.g., "Lens: $$10 ;\textrm{GHO}$$" without explicit parameter labels), making the list coherent and reducing ambiguity. The clarified description on line 39 establishes that all listed values represent $$c_l$$ (the chain-specific lower cap).