The Imperative UX Lie is that users will tolerate managing seed phrases and gas fees. They will not. Every mainstream product, from Uniswap to Coinbase Wallet, has failed to onboard the next billion users because the cognitive load is too high.
account-abstraction-fixing-crypto-ux
Blog
The Future of dApp Design: Declarative Interfaces Powered by AA
We argue that dApp front-ends will devolve into simple declarative forms, offloading all contract logic, approvals, and state management to smart accounts and solver networks. This is the inevitable endgame for usable crypto.
introduction
THE UX DECEPTION
Introduction: The UX Lie We've Been Telling Ourselves
Current dApp UX is a dead end, and Account Abstraction is the only viable path to mainstream adoption.
Declarative Interfaces replace imperative commands. Users state what they want (e.g., 'swap ETH for ARB'), not how to do it (sign, approve, bridge, swap). This shift requires intent-based architectures and a new transaction layer.
Account Abstraction (ERC-4337) enables this by decoupling execution from signature. It allows for gas sponsorship, batched operations, and session keys, turning complex multi-step DeFi interactions into single-click experiences.
Evidence: The Arbitrum ecosystem saw a 400% increase in daily active smart accounts after native AA support. Protocols like Particle Network and Biconomy now process millions of user operations monthly, proving the model scales.
thesis-statement
THE PARADIGM SHIFT
Thesis: From Imperative Commands to Declarative Intents
The next evolution in dApp design replaces explicit transaction signing with outcome-based declarations, powered by Account Abstraction.
Declarative interfaces replace imperative commands. Users specify what they want, not how to achieve it. This shifts complexity from the user to the network's solver layer.
Account Abstraction (ERC-4337) is the enabling primitive. It decouples transaction logic from the Externally Owned Account (EOA), allowing for intent-based transaction flows and gas sponsorship.
This mirrors the evolution from assembly to SQL. Imperative dApps require users to be the 'CPU'. Declarative dApps let users be the 'query', with solvers like UniswapX or CowSwap handling execution.
Evidence: UniswapX processed over $7B in volume in 2024 by letting users declare a swap outcome, while its fillers competed on routing across DEXs and bridges like Across.
market-context
FROM ABSTRACTION TO DECLARATION
The Market Context: Intents Are Already Winning
The shift from imperative transactions to declarative intents is not theoretical—it's already driving the most efficient on-chain volume.
01
The Problem: The Imperative Transaction Tax
Users pay a massive tax in time and capital for managing low-level blockchain mechanics. This includes gas estimation, slippage tolerance, and multi-step routing, which creates a poor UX and centralizes power in frontends.
- ~$1B+ in MEV extracted annually from failed transactions.
- >60% of DeFi users struggle with gas management.
- Protocol complexity is hidden behind fragile, custodial front-ends.
$1B+
MEV Tax
>60%
UX Friction
02
The Solution: UniswapX & CowSwap's Fill-or-Kill Guarantee
These protocols abstract execution into a competitive solver network. Users declare an outcome (e.g., "swap X for Y"), and specialized actors compete to fulfill it optimally.
- Zero gas for failed trades (Fill-or-Kill).
- ~$10B+ in cumulative trade volume via intents.
- MEV protection via batch auctions and private order flows.
$10B+
Intent Volume
0 Gas
On Failure
03
The Enabler: Account Abstraction as Universal Intent Vehicle
ERC-4337 and native AA (like zkSync, Starknet) provide the standard substrate for intent expression. Smart accounts turn user "wants" into programmable, gas-abstracted operations.
- Session keys enable seamless multi-step interactions.
- Paymasters allow sponsorship and gasless onboarding.
- Bundlers & Solvers become the new execution layer.
ERC-4337
Standard
~5M
AA Wallets
04
The Future: dApps as Pure Declarative Interfaces
Frontends evolve from transaction broadcasters to intent composers. The dApp's job is to help users define constraints (price, time, privacy), not micromanage execution.
- Cross-chain intents via Across, LayerZero, and Chainlink CCIP.
- Composability shifts to the solver layer, not the user.
- Revenue models move from gas kickbacks to fulfillment fees.
100%
Focus on Outcome
Multi-Chain
By Default
DAPP ARCHITECTURE
Imperative vs. Declarative: A Feature Matrix
A technical comparison of user interaction models in blockchain applications, highlighting the paradigm shift enabled by Account Abstraction and intent-based protocols.
| Feature / Metric | Imperative (Traditional) | Declarative (Intent-Based) | Hybrid (AA-Enhanced) |
|---|---|---|---|
User Action Required | Sign every transaction | Sign a single intent | Sign a session key or policy |
Gas Management | User holds native gas token | Relayer pays gas (Gasless) | Paymaster sponsors gas in any token |
Transaction Success Rate | ~60-80% (MEV, slippage) | ~95%+ (via Solvers/Aggregators) | ~85-95% (with batching) |
Typical Latency (Swap) | ~12-45 seconds | < 5 seconds (pre-confirmed) | ~5-15 seconds |
Cross-Chain Complexity | Manual bridging & approvals | Single intent (e.g., Across, LayerZero) | Unified Account across chains |
MEV Protection | None (user is target) | Full (Solver competition) | Partial (via bundling) |
Protocol Examples | Uniswap V3, Aave V2 | UniswapX, CowSwap, 1inch Fusion | Safe{Wallet}, Biconomy, Etherspot |
Smart Contract Wallet Required |
deep-dive
THE STACK
Deep Dive: The Architectural Stack of a Declarative dApp
Declarative dApps separate user intent from execution, requiring a new, modular infrastructure stack.
The core abstraction is intent. Users state a goal (e.g., 'swap X for Y at best price'), and a solver network like UniswapX or CowSwap competes to fulfill it. This inverts the imperative model where users manually sign each transaction step.
Account Abstraction (ERC-4337) is the mandatory entry point. It provides the intent standard format (UserOperation) and the paymaster model for gas sponsorship. Without AA, declarative interfaces cannot abstract transaction construction or guarantee atomic execution.
Specialized solvers replace generalized block builders. Solvers are specialized MEV searchers that execute complex, cross-domain strategies. They integrate with intent-centric bridges like Across and layerzero to source liquidity and finalize settlements across chains.
The settlement layer is a new market. The winning solver's transaction bundle settles on-chain, but the auction mechanism (e.g., CowSwap's batch auctions) determines efficiency. This creates a competitive market for execution quality, not just block space.
Evidence: UniswapX, which offloads routing to solvers, now processes over $10B in volume, demonstrating demand for outsourced execution complexity.
protocol-spotlight
THE ARCHITECTS OF DECLARATIVE UX
Protocol Spotlight: Who's Building This Future?
These protocols are abstracting away blockchain's complexity, turning user commands into optimized on-chain execution.
01
UniswapX: The Gasless Swapper
UniswapX replaces direct AMM swaps with a declarative order. Users sign an intent for the best price; a network of fillers competes to execute it off-chain, settling on-chain later.\n- Gasless for users – Execution cost is absorbed by professional fillers.\n- Better price discovery – Aggregates liquidity across AMMs and private OTC pools.\n- MEV protection – Orders are filled at the signed price or better, eliminating front-running.
$1B+
Volume
0 Gas
User Cost
02
Across & LayerZero: The Intent-Based Bridge
These protocols treat bridging as a declarative problem. Users state a destination chain and token; a solver network sources liquidity and executes the optimal route.\n- Capital efficiency – Uses a single liquidity pool on the destination chain, not locked funds on every chain.\n- Speed – ~1-4 minute finality via optimistic verification, vs. 10+ minutes for native bridges.\n- Unified liquidity – Solves the fragmented liquidity problem of canonical bridges.
~1-4 min
Settlement
-90%
Capital Locked
03
Essential & Rhinestone: The Modular Smart Account
These are not dApps but core infrastructure enabling declarative design. They provide modular Account Abstraction (AA) stacks, allowing dApps to define user intents via custom modules.\n- Composable security – Users can add session keys, social recovery, and policy engines as modules.\n- Developer primitives – Turns complex flows (e.g., "swap and stake") into a single user signature.\n- Chain-agnostic – Abstracted account logic works across EVM chains via ERC-4337 and beyond.
10+
Chain Support
100+
Modules
04
The Problem: Solver Centralization Risk
Declarative systems rely on a solver/filler network to execute intents. This creates a new centralization vector and potential for collusion.\n- Economic security – Solvers must be sufficiently decentralized and bonded to prevent censorship.\n- MEV redistribution – Protocols like CowSwap use batch auctions and CoW DAO to redistribute extracted value back to users.\n- Verifiability – Users must trust the solver's execution proof; zero-knowledge proofs are the endgame for trust minimization.
<10
Major Solvers
Critical
Risk Vector
counter-argument
THE TRUST TRAP
Counter-Argument: Centralization and Opaque Execution
Declarative interfaces shift trust from code to a new class of centralized, opaque off-chain actors.
Solver centralization is inevitable. The economic model of intent-based systems like UniswapX and CowSwap favors large, well-capitalized solvers who can guarantee execution, creating a small oligopoly that controls transaction flow.
Execution becomes a black box. Users submit an intent, but the solver's off-chain logic is opaque. This replaces the deterministic, on-chain verification of traditional transactions with trust in a private optimization process.
This recreates Web2 intermediaries. The solver role mirrors a centralized exchange's matching engine, introducing a single point of failure and potential censorship that account abstraction wallets were designed to eliminate.
Evidence: In early 2024, over 80% of UniswapX volume was filled by just three solvers, demonstrating rapid centralization despite the protocol's permissionless design.
risk-analysis
ARCHITECTURAL FRAGILITY
Risk Analysis: What Could Derail This Future?
Declarative dApps shift complexity from users to infrastructure, creating new systemic risks.
01
Solver Cartels & Centralized Liquidity
The intent-based model creates a new MEV supply chain. If a few dominant solvers (e.g., from UniswapX, CowSwap) collude or fail, the entire user experience collapses. Liquidity becomes centralized in a handful of execution venues.
- Risk: >60% of cross-chain intent volume could be controlled by <5 entities.
- Consequence: Censorship, extractive pricing, and single points of failure.
>60%
Volume Control
<5
Dominant Solvers
02
Account Abstraction Wallet Lock-In
Declarative UX depends on smart contract wallets (ERC-4337). If major AA providers (Safe, ZeroDev, Biconomy) implement proprietary paymaster or bundler networks, they create walled gardens. Users lose sovereignty and portability.
- Risk: ~80% of AA wallets rely on <3 centralized bundler RPC endpoints.
- Consequence: Protocol capture, rent extraction, and fragmentation of the AA standard.
~80%
RPC Reliance
<3
Key Bundlers
03
Intent Ambiguity & Liability Gaps
A declarative "I want the best price" is legally and technically ambiguous. When a solver's execution leads to a loss (e.g., via an obscure bridge hack like Multichain), who is liable? The dApp frontend, the solver network, or the user?
- Risk: Zero legal precedent for intent-based financial liability.
- Consequence: Regulatory crackdowns, solver insolvencies, and user fund losses with no recourse.
$0
Insured
0
Legal Precedent
04
The Verifier's Dilemma & Infinite Liveness
Solver networks (e.g., Across, SUAVE) require someone to verify that the executed outcome matches the user's intent. This is computationally expensive and unrewarded. If verification fails, the system relies on social consensus or fraud proofs, breaking the trustless promise.
- Risk: >1 hour dispute resolution windows make the system unsuitable for high-frequency use.
- Consequence: Capital inefficiency, delayed finality, and reversion to trusted committees.
>1h
Dispute Window
High
Trust Assumption
05
Frontend Centralization & Censorship Vectors
The complex intent construction logic will live in centralized frontends (like today's major DeFi websites). These become critical choke points for regulation and censorship, more so than the underlying protocols.
- Risk: >90% of declarative dApp traffic flows through <10 frontend domains.
- Consequence: Geo-blocking, transaction filtering, and the re-creation of Web2 gatekeepers.
>90%
Traffic Share
<10
Frontend Domains
06
Economic Sustainability of Public Mempools
If all advanced users shift to private intent channels (via solvers), the public mempool becomes a dumping ground for toxic order flow. This kills the economic model for base-layer block builders and validators, potentially destabilizing L1/L2 security.
- Risk: ~30-50% reduction in public mempool fee revenue for Ethereum.
- Consequence: Increased validator centralization, higher inflation to compensate, and L1 security degradation.
30-50%
Fee Loss
High
Security Impact
future-outlook
THE ARCHITECTURAL SHIFT
Future Outlook: The Declarative Stack Consolidates
The future of dApp design is declarative interfaces powered by Account Abstraction, moving execution complexity from users to specialized solvers.
Declarative interfaces become the standard. Users state desired outcomes, not transaction steps. This shifts complexity from the client to a solver network, enabled by Account Abstraction's programmable validation logic.
The dApp frontend unbundles. The interface is a thin declarative layer. The heavy lifting moves to intent-centric backends like UniswapX, CowSwap, and Across Protocol, which compete on execution quality.
Account Abstraction enables this shift. ERC-4337 and smart accounts provide the transaction orchestration layer. They delegate authority to solvers and batch actions, making declarative flows secure and atomic.
Evidence: UniswapX processed over $7B volume by abstracting routing and MEV protection into a declarative system, demonstrating user preference for outcome-based interaction.
takeaways
ACTIONABLE INSIGHTS
Key Takeaways for Builders and Investors
Declarative interfaces and Account Abstraction are not incremental upgrades; they are a paradigm shift in user experience and developer economics.
01
The Problem: The Transaction is a UX Dead End
Every dApp today is a bespoke transaction builder, forcing users to understand gas, nonces, and approval flows. This complexity caps the total addressable market at ~1-2M power users.
- Key Benefit 1: Users declare what they want (e.g., "Buy ETH"), not how to do it.
- Key Benefit 2: Solver networks like UniswapX and CowSwap compete on execution, abstracting away MEV and slippage.
90%+
Drop-off Reduced
1-2M
Current Active Users
02
The Solution: AA as the Universal Declarative Runtime
Account Abstraction (ERC-4337) provides the settlement layer for intent-based systems, enabling sponsored transactions, batched operations, and session keys.
- Key Benefit 1: Paymasters allow for gasless onboarding, a >50% conversion lift.
- Key Benefit 2: Bundlers aggregate user operations, reducing on-chain footprint and cost by ~30-40%.
ERC-4337
Standard
-40%
Avg. Cost
03
The New Stack: Intent Infrastructure is the Moat
Winning dApps won't build their own solvers; they will plug into specialized intent infrastructure layers like Across, Anoma, and Essential.
- Key Benefit 1: Developers focus on the interface and business logic, not execution optimization.
- Key Benefit 2: Cross-chain intents become trivial, moving beyond basic bridges to unified liquidity access.
$10B+
Intent Volume
~500ms
Solver Latency
04
The Investment Thesis: Vertical Integration Wins
The greatest value accrual will be at the intersection of the declarative interface, the AA wallet, and the solver network. Think UniswapX + Smart Wallet.
- Key Benefit 1: Captures the full value chain from user intent to on-chain settlement.
- Key Benefit 2: Creates unbreakable user lock-in through superior UX and aggregated liquidity.
10x
User LTV
>60%
Market Share
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.
NDA Protected
Confidentiality24h Response
Time to ValueDirectly to Engineering Team
No Sales Fluff10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall