This is the first Talos update that makes “AI treasury” feel real on @arbitrum. The win isn’t the buzzword, it’s cadence an agent that can rebalance, migrate vaults, and rotate risk often without bleeding gas will outrun human-paced treasuries. I sanity-checked the plumbing and the numbers. Arbitrum’s fee model (Docs → Gas & Fees) separates L2 execution from L1 calldata, so frequent, small moves don’t torch the budget. In practice, the Arbiscan → Transaction Fee chart backs the “>90% cheaper than mainnet” claim over a wide range of days, with only occasional calldata spikes. And there’s real surface area for an autonomous vault to work with: GMX (Docs → Trading v2) and Camelot liquidity give room to route without slippage death. --- ❯ Arbitrum vs mainnet: cents vs dollars per action; that cost delta enables higher rebalance cadence ❯ User step: check Arbiscan’s Transaction Fee chart before/after vault ops to gauge cost regime ❯ Dev note: throttle keeper frequency on calldata spikes; resume when batch costs normalize --- Net/net on my framework cost, cadence, composability the Talos thesis holds. The remaining work is agent safety and governance guardrails, but the execution rails are there. I’ll be tracking vault rebalance frequency, realized slippage vs model, and any integrations Talos spins up with GMX/Camelot.