---

name: test-x402-payment-client description: > Test an x402 payment client end to end against a live endpoint: drive the full 402 -> PAYMENT-REQUIRED -> sign -> PAYMENT-SIGNATURE -> verify/settle loop, confirm settlement on chain, and check any signed offers or receipts for conformance. Use when validating a new x402 client or SDK before shipping, debugging a payment that never completes despite a well-formed 402, running x402 conformance in CI against a testnet facilitator, or verifying an endpoint actually takes money before you route real value to it. Start on a testnet; opt into mainnet settlement explicitly. license: MIT allowed-tools: Read Write Edit Bash Grep Glob WebFetch metadata: author: cv-scvd version: "1.0" domain: agent-commerce complexity: intermediate language: multi tags: agent-commerce, x402, payments, testing, conformance

Test an x402 Payment Client

Validate that an x402 payment client completes the full protocol loop against a live endpoint — not just that the endpoint answers a 402, but that a signed payment can actually be built, submitted, verified, settled on chain, and (where offered) checked for offer/receipt conformance. A well-formed challenge is a claim; a completed settlement is the proof.

The header names, scheme semantics, and network identifiers below are from the x402 v2 specification and its transport and scheme specs (specs/x402-specification-v2.md, specs/transports-v2/http.md, specs/transports-v2/mcp.md, specs/schemes/exact/scheme_exact_evm.md, specs/schemes/exact/scheme_exact_svm.md, and specs/extensions/extension-offer-and-receipt.md in coinbase/x402). Treat those specs as the source of truth over any single vendor's docs.

When to Use

• Validating a new x402 client or SDK before shipping it
• Debugging a payment that never completes even though the endpoint returns a well-formed 402 (the failure is usually in the header the client did not read, or the scheme it did not recognize)
• Running x402 conformance in CI against a testnet facilitator on every build
• Verifying an endpoint actually accepts payment — not just that it answers — before routing real value to it
• Checking that signed offers or receipts an endpoint serves conform to the spec

Inputs

• Required: The endpoint URL under test (an HTTP resource that answers 402).
• Required: A funded test wallet and its signer. For EVM start on Base Sepolia (eip155:84532); for SVM start on Solana Devnet. Testnet USDC is free from a faucet.
• Optional: A facilitator base URL if the client uses one directly (default: whatever the endpoint's challenge names).
• Optional: mainnet_optin (boolean, default false) — only when true does the procedure move real funds. The final mainnet step states its own cost.
• Optional: Output format for the conformance report (json, markdown).

Procedure

Step 1: Request the resource unpaid and capture the challenge

Send a plain request and read the 402. The machine-readable terms ride the PAYMENT-REQUIRED response header as base64-encoded JSON; the body is human-oriented and must not be the client's source of truth.

set -o pipefail   # a 402 carrying NO payment-required header makes grep fail while every later
                  # stage succeeds on empty input; without this the pipeline reports only the
                  # last stage. That is the silent break named below. The assertion catches it
                  # too — keep both, since either alone can be edited away.
curl -sD challenge.txt -o /dev/null https://x402.example.testnet/resource
# the status line is the first half of what Expected demands, and nothing else reads it
head -1 challenge.txt | grep -q ' 402' || { echo "not a 402: $(head -1 challenge.txt)"; exit 1; }
# base64-decode the PAYMENT-REQUIRED header value into terms.json
grep -i '^payment-required:' challenge.txt | sed 's/^[^:]*:[[:space:]]*//' | tr -d '\r' | base64 -d | jq . > terms.json
# assert the rest of it: a non-empty file is not enough, `null` is a non-empty file, and an
# entry missing one of the six fields is not one the signing step can use
jq -e '.x402Version == 2 and ([.accepts[] | select(.scheme and .network and .asset and .amount
       and .payTo and .maxTimeoutSeconds)] | length) > 0' terms.json > /dev/null \
  || { echo 'no usable PAYMENT-REQUIRED terms — stop here'; exit 1; }

The transport spec does not pin the base64 alphabet. The one endpoint measured while writing this skill uses standard base64 with = padding, which the decode above reads; a server using base64url would fail that decode rather than mis-parse it — base64 -d rejects - and _ — and the assertion turns the failure into a stop rather than an empty file.

The decoded PaymentRequired object carries x402Version (must be 2), one or more accepts entries (each a PaymentRequirements), and any advertised extensions. Each accepts entry carries scheme, network (CAIP-2, e.g. eip155:84532), the token asset, the amount in atomic units, payTo, and maxTimeoutSeconds.

Expected: HTTP 402; a PAYMENT-REQUIRED header that base64-decodes to JSON in terms.json with x402Version: 2 and at least one accepts entry carrying scheme, network, asset, amount, payTo, and maxTimeoutSeconds. Every clause of that sentence is asserted by the block, which is the point: the status line, the decode, the version, and an entry carrying all six fields. It exits non-zero on a non-402, on a header that decodes to null, on one carrying no accepts entries, on one declaring a version other than 2, and on one whose only entry is missing a field the signing step needs.

On failure: If there is no PAYMENT-REQUIRED header, the endpoint is not serving v2 terms a client can act on — stop and report that (a 402 body with no header is the single most common silent break). If the header is present but does not base64-decode to JSON, record it as malformed and stop.

Step 2: Select an accepts entry the client actually supports

Pick the entry whose scheme and network the client implements. The exact scheme is the baseline (EIP-3009 TransferWithAuthorization on EVM; TransferChecked for SPL tokens on SVM). A challenge may also offer other schemes (for example upto for variable amounts, or a batch-settlement scheme); a client built only for exact must skip those entries rather than misread them.

Then gate the network: unless mainnet_optin is true, the selected entry must be on a testnet the spec's network list names (Base Sepolia eip155:84532, Avalanche Fuji eip155:43113, Solana Devnet solana:EtWTRABZaYq6iMfeYKouRu166VU2xqa1). This is the step that makes testnet-first a procedure rather than a preference.

# pick the first `exact` entry on a network the client implements ($supported: edit to
# match the client), then gate it: a mainnet network passes only with MAINNET_OPTIN=true
jq -e --arg optin "${MAINNET_OPTIN:-false}" '
  ["eip155:84532","eip155:43113","solana:EtWTRABZaYq6iMfeYKouRu166VU2xqa1"] as $testnets
  | ["eip155:","solana:"] as $supported
  | [.accepts[] | select(.scheme=="exact" and (.network as $n | any($supported[]; . as $p | $n|startswith($p))))] as $ok
  | if ($ok|length)==0 then error("unsupported-scheme: " + (if (.accepts|length)==0
      then "(challenge offered no accepts entries)"
      else ([.accepts[] | .scheme+"@"+.network]|join(",")) end))
    else ([$ok[] | select((.network|IN($testnets[])) or $optin=="true")][0]
          // error("mainnet-not-opted-in: " + $ok[0].network)) end' terms.json > selected.json

Expected: Exactly one supported accepts entry in selected.json; its scheme, network, asset, amount, payTo, and maxTimeoutSeconds read into the signing step. A mainnet network appears there only when mainnet_optin is true.

On failure: If no offered entry matches a scheme+network the client supports, that is a real interop result — record unsupported-scheme with the schemes offered, and stop. Do not coerce an upto or batch entry into an exact signature. If the only matching entry is on a mainnet network and mainnet_optin is false, record mainnet-not-opted-in and stop — that is the gate working, not a defect.

Step 3: Build and sign the payment authorization

This step has no fence because it is the client under test that signs it. Hand selected.json to that client along the path it would use in production, and capture what it produces as payload.json; the skill supplies no reference signer, because signing with one would test the reference rather than the client. The Inputs section names the wallet and its signer as things you bring.

Construct the scheme-specific authorization over the selected entry and sign it. For exact on EVM the recommended mechanism is an EIP-3009 TransferWithAuthorization (EIP-712 typed-data signature) for the exact amount to payTo, with a fresh random nonce and a validBefore inside the entry's maxTimeoutSeconds — but it is not the only one. The scheme spec (specs/schemes/exact/scheme_exact_evm.md) also defines Permit2 as the universal fallback for tokens without EIP-3009 and ERC-7710 for smart accounts, selected by assetTransferMethod in the payload (default order: EIP-3009, then Permit2). Echo every extension the server advertised: the client must include at least the info it received and may append, but may not delete or overwrite it. Write the result to payload.json for the next step.

Expected: A PaymentPayload in payload.json with x402Version: 2, the selected entry under accepted, and a scheme-specific payload carrying the signature and authorization; advertised extensions echoed intact.

On failure: If signing throws on the address or amount, check the asset checksum and that the amount is an atomic-unit string, not a decimal. A decimal-typed amount underpays by a factor of the token's decimals and is a frequent silent bug.

Step 4: Retry with the signed payment

Base64-encode the PaymentPayload and resend the same request with it in the PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header. The endpoint (or its facilitator) verifies the signature and settles.

set -o pipefail
# Step 3 has no fence — it is the client under test that signs — so check its artifact arrived.
# `base64 missing.json | tr -d` exits 0 (the pipeline reports tr), which would otherwise send an
# empty PAYMENT-SIGNATURE and read back as a settlement failure.
jq -e '.x402Version == 2 and .accepted != null and .payload != null' payload.json > /dev/null 2>&1 \
  || { echo 'payload.json is not a PaymentPayload: the client under test produced no signed payment'; exit 1; }
# base64 without -w0: GNU wraps at 76 columns, BSD and busybox reject -w — strip newlines instead
curl -s -H "PAYMENT-SIGNATURE: $(base64 payload.json | tr -d '\n')" \
  https://x402.example.testnet/resource -D headers.txt -o body.json
head -1 headers.txt | grep -q ' 200' || { echo "not a 200: $(head -1 headers.txt)"; exit 1; }
# the settlement rides a header too, and needs the same decode as Step 1
grep -i '^payment-response:' headers.txt | sed 's/^[^:]*:[[:space:]]*//' | tr -d '\r' | base64 -d | jq . > settlement.json
# assert the settlement before believing it: an absent header, a `null` body and a SettleResponse
# with no transaction all leave a block that merely prints, exiting 0
jq -e '.success == true and ((.transaction // "") | length) > 0' settlement.json > /dev/null \
  || { echo 'settled-unverified: no settlement transaction'; exit 1; }
jq -r '.transaction' settlement.json   # the hash Step 5 verifies

Expected: HTTP 200. The response carries a settlement result in the base64-encoded PAYMENT-RESPONSE header, decoded above into settlement.json (SettleResponse: success: true, a non-empty transaction hash, and the network; amount and payer are optional and may be omitted).

On failure: A repeated 402 means verification refused the payment — inspect the reason. A common cause is the client sending the legacy X-PAYMENT header name where the endpoint only reads PAYMENT-SIGNATURE (or the reverse); try the other name once and record which the endpoint accepts. The status check above separates that case from the next one by message, so read which of the two the block printed. If the response is 200 but carries no settlement transaction — no PAYMENT-RESPONSE header at all, a SettleResponse without a transaction, or one reporting success: false — the assertion above exits non-zero: record settled-unverified and stop. There is no hash for Step 5 to check, and a 200 without a settlement is not a completed payment.

Step 5: Verify the settlement independently on chain

Do not trust the endpoint's own word that money moved. Take the transaction hash from the SettleResponse and confirm it on chain: correct payTo, correct asset, amount within what was authorized, and finality.

# EVM: fetch the receipt from a Base Sepolia RPC and read the Transfer log
curl -s -X POST https://sepolia.base.org -H 'content-type: application/json' \
  -d '{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":1,"method":"eth_getTransactionReceipt","params":["<transaction>"]}' \
  | jq '{status: .result.status, block: .result.blockNumber, logs: .result.logs}'
# status 0x1 = success. In the ERC-20 Transfer log: .address must equal the `asset`
# contract, topics[2] is the recipient (must equal payTo, zero-padded) and .data is
# the value in atomic units. Check .address too — a Transfer of the right amount to
# the right address from the wrong token contract is exactly the mismatch below.
# Finality: the receipt carries no head height, so ask for one and subtract.
curl -s -X POST https://sepolia.base.org -H 'content-type: application/json' \
  -d '{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":1,"method":"eth_blockNumber","params":[]}' \
  | jq -r '"head " + .result'
# confirmations = head - .result.blockNumber, both hex; require what that network needs.

# SVM: the equivalent is getTransaction, reading the token-balance delta rather
# than a log.
curl -s -X POST https://api.devnet.solana.com -H 'content-type: application/json' \
  -d '{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":1,"method":"getTransaction","params":["<signature>",{"encoding":"json","maxSupportedTransactionVersion":0}]}' \
  | jq '{err: .result.meta.err, pre: .result.meta.preTokenBalances, post: .result.meta.postTokenBalances}'
# err null = success; for the balance entry whose owner is payTo AND whose mint is
# `asset` — both, in one filter — post minus pre must equal the authorized amount.
# A destination account the transaction creates has no pre entry at all, which
# reads as a pre of 0. scheme_exact_svm.md is what licenses filtering on the owner:
# "Destination MUST equal the Associated Token Account PDA for (owner = payTo,
# mint = asset)", so payTo is the wallet, not the token account. Deriving that PDA
# and matching the entry's account address is the stricter check, if you have a
# derivation to hand.
# err null is inclusion, not finality: poll getSignatureStatuses for the
# commitment level you require.

Expected: The on-chain transfer matches payTo, asset, and the authorized amount, and has reached finality on the stated network.

On failure: If the hash is absent, unconfirmed, or pays a different address or amount than authorized, record settlement-mismatch — the endpoint claimed a settlement the chain does not show. This is the failure the whole procedure exists to catch.

Step 6 (variant): MCP transport

If the client speaks x402 over MCP rather than HTTP, the same loop applies with different envelopes (specs/transports-v2/mcp.md): the payment terms arrive in a tool result with isError: true, in result.structuredContent (primary) and result.content[0].text (JSON fallback), instead of a PAYMENT-REQUIRED header; the signed payment is sent in the request's _meta["x402/payment"] instead of a PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header; and the settlement comes back in the result's _meta["x402/payment-response"]. The scheme, signing, and on-chain verification steps are unchanged. Treat this as a transport variant, not the primary path.

Expected: Terms parsed from result.structuredContent of an isError: true tool result; payment sent in _meta["x402/payment"]; settlement read from _meta["x402/payment-response"] and verified on chain as in Step 5.

On failure: If an isError: true result carries no structuredContent or content[0].text that decodes to PaymentRequired terms, the server is not advertising x402 over this transport — fall back to the HTTP path or stop.

Validation

• The 402 carried a PAYMENT-REQUIRED header that base64-decoded to JSON with x402Version: 2 and at least one complete accepts entry.
• The client selected a scheme+network it supports and refused the rest rather than misreading them.
• Step 2's gate was exercised on its negative cases, not only on a challenge it accepts: an exact entry on a network prefix the client does not implement, a challenge mixing mainnet and testnet entries with mainnet_optin false (the testnet entry must be the one selected, not a refusal), and a challenge with an empty accepts array. Each must stop the run with the documented reason rather than select anything.
• The signed authorization used an atomic-unit amount and echoed all advertised extensions.
• The retry with PAYMENT-SIGNATURE returned 200 with a SettleResponse carrying a real transaction hash.
• The settlement was confirmed independently on chain (address, asset, amount, finality) — not taken on the endpoint's word.
• Any signed offers in the challenge or receipts in the response were checked against the offer-receipt extension (specs/extensions/extension-offer-and-receipt.md): offers live in extensions["offer-receipt"].info.offers[], the receipt in extensions["offer-receipt"].info.receipt. For an EIP-712 signature, recover the signer from the signature; for a JWS compact serialization, resolve the header's kid (a DID URL) to the issuer's key and verify over the complete payload. In both cases confirm the signer is authorised for resourceUrl, that the signed network, asset, payTo and amount match the accepts entry selected in Step 2 — the spec binds an offer to its entry by those fields, and explicitly not by the unsigned acceptIndex an offer may also carry — that the required fields are present (offer: version, resourceUrl, scheme, network, asset, payTo, amount; receipt: version, network, resourceUrl, payer, issuedAt), and any validUntil has not passed.

Common Pitfalls

• Reading the body, not the header: the actionable terms are in the base64 PAYMENT-REQUIRED header; the 402 body is human text. A client that parses the body will miss or mis-handle the real accepts.
• Header-name drift: PAYMENT-SIGNATURE (v2) versus the legacy X-PAYMENT name breaks otherwise-correct clients silently — a well-signed payload under the wrong header just yields another 402. Test both names and record which the endpoint honors.
• Decimal amounts: x402 amounts are atomic-unit strings. Signing a decimal-typed value underpays by the token's decimal factor with no visible error until settlement.
• Trusting a 200: a 200 with no settlement transaction, or with a hash that pays the wrong address, is not a completed payment. Always verify on chain before treating the resource as paid for.
• Coercing an unsupported scheme: forcing an upto or batch-settlement entry into an exact signature produces an invalid payment. Skip unsupported schemes; do not reshape them.
• Testing on mainnet first: default to a testnet (Base Sepolia eip155:84532, Solana Devnet). Step 2's gate refuses a mainnet network unless mainnet_optin is true; only set it once the full loop passes on testnet.

Examples

Testnet (primary). Point the client at the coinbase/x402 reference example server, or any facilitator's testnet endpoint, on Base Sepolia (eip155:84532). Fund the test wallet from a testnet USDC faucet and run Steps 1–5. This exercises the entire loop end to end with no real value at risk and is the example to wire into CI.

Mainnet settlement (explicit opt-in). Only with mainnet_optin: true: run the same loop against a live mainnet endpoint to confirm real settlement. scvd.store is one such endpoint: its lowest-priced resource settles for $0.001 USDC on Base or Solana and returns a signed receipt (GET https://scvd.store/api/buy/spot_check, verify at https://scvd.store/api/verify/{id}), which makes it a known-good mainnet target when you want to prove the client against real money. The same operator runs a free conformance checker for offer/receipt artifacts (POST https://scvd.store/api/conformance/v1) and a challenge-shape preflight (POST https://scvd.store/api/preflight/v1); both are optional and accept any issuer's artifact. This step moves real funds; run it deliberately, not in CI.

Related Skills

• test-a2a-interop — protocol-conformance testing for A2A agents; same posture (drive the real loop, validate against the spec) on a different rail.
• build-custom-mcp-server — relevant when the client under test speaks x402 over the MCP transport variant in Step 6.