2025-2030: The Agent Ecosystem Wars—Five Futures for the Agentic Web

Note: This article explores hypothetical future scenarios for agent ecosystems. Current marketplace implementations (OpenAI Connector Registry, Anthropic Plugin Marketplaces) do not charge transaction fees as of October 2025. Projections about future monetization models are speculative based on historical patterns from app stores, not announced plans.

October 2025. The agentic web is no longer theoretical. OpenAI ships AgentKit. Anthropic launches plugin marketplaces. Claude Code runs 7-hour autonomous sessions. ChatGPT Apps reach 800 million users.

But how this ecosystem evolves over the next five years is wide open.

Will we get marketplace monopolies controlling agent access? Or open web discovery where agents freely navigate capabilities? Will agents replace browsers? Will your fridge run MCP servers? Will "AIO optimization" become the new SEO arms race?

The forces are in motion. The battles are beginning. The winners aren't determined yet.

This article explores five possible futures for the agentic web—from utopian open ecosystems to dystopian walled gardens, from IoT integration to hub consolidation.

Welcome to the agent ecosystem wars.

---

Part 1: The Battlefield—Forces in Motion

The Players

Big Tech Platforms:

• OpenAI – AgentKit + Connector Registry (enterprise focus)
• Anthropic – Claude Code + Plugin Marketplaces (developer focus)
• Google – Gemini integration (search + cloud leverage)
• Microsoft – Copilot + Azure (enterprise + dev tools)
• Apple – Siri + Shortcuts (consumer + privacy angle)
• Meta – Llama ecosystem (open source strategy)

Open Standards:

• MCP – Model Context Protocol (Anthropic-initiated, but open)
• LLMFeed – Trust + discovery layer (.well-known/)
• OpenAPI/Swagger – Existing REST API standards
• W3C standards – Future agent interoperability specs

Infrastructure Providers:

• Cloud platforms – AWS, Azure, GCP competing for agent workloads
• CDN networks – Cloudflare, Fastly enabling global discovery
• IoT platforms – Home Assistant, Matter, Thread for device integration

The Disruptors:

• Startups – Building next-gen agent tooling
• Open source – Community-driven standards
• Web publishers – Fighting for agent visibility
• Developers – Building on all platforms simultaneously

---

Part 2: The Tension—Centralization vs Decentralization

The Marketplace Model (Centralized)

How it works:

Developer → Submit to Registry → Platform Approves → Users Discover

Advantages:

• ✅ Curated quality
• ✅ Security review
• ✅ Monetization infrastructure
• ✅ Version control
• ✅ Enterprise compliance

Disadvantages:

• ❌ Gatekeeper approval required (days to weeks delay)
• ❌ Platform lock-in (vendor-specific APIs)
• ❌ Potential future monetization (revenue sharing possible but unannounced)
• ❌ Limited to approved capabilities only
• ❌ Slow innovation cycles (approval bottleneck)

Current examples:

• OpenAI Connector Registry (enterprise beta)
• Anthropic Plugin Marketplace (internal tools)
• Future: Apple Agent Store? Google Agent Hub?

The Open Web Model (Decentralized)

How it works:

Developer → Publish to .well-known/ → Agents Discover → Trust Verification

Advantages:

• ✅ No approval needed
• ✅ Instant global availability
• ✅ No platform fees
• ✅ Cross-platform compatibility
• ✅ Rapid innovation

Disadvantages:

• ❌ No quality guarantees
• ❌ Security burden on agents
• ❌ Monetization DIY
• ❌ Visibility challenges
• ❌ Spam/abuse potential

Current examples:

• LLMFeed .well-known/ discovery
• OpenAPI/Swagger self-publishing
• Future: Universal agent crawlers?

---

Part 3: Five Futures (2026-2030)

Future 1: "The Walled Gardens" (Dystopian)

What happens:

• Big Tech platforms create exclusive marketplace ecosystems
• Agents can only access capabilities approved by their platform
• Cross-platform discovery intentionally broken
• Revenue sharing required for all agent interactions

The world in 2030:

"Alexa, book a flight"
→ "This capability requires Amazon Agent Prime ($9.99/month)"

"ChatGPT, order food"
→ "Only OpenAI Verified Partners can process payments"

"Claude, check my calendar"
→ "Google Calendar requires Anthropic Enterprise license"

Who wins:

• ✅ Big Tech platforms (control over access & potential future revenue)
• ✅ Approved partners (guaranteed visibility)
• ✅ Enterprise vendors (compliance simplified)

Who loses:

• ❌ Small developers (approval barriers, time to market)
• ❌ Open source (no approval process compatibility)
• ❌ Users (less choice, potential higher costs if fees introduced)
• ❌ Innovation (slow approval cycles, gatekeeping delays)

Probability: 30%

Why it could happen:

• Regulatory pressure pushes platforms toward curation
• Security incidents create fear of "unapproved" capabilities
• Users prioritize convenience over openness
• Platforms maximize shareholder value

Why it might not:

• Antitrust regulation forces openness
• Developer backlash (similar to App Store fights)
• Open source agents gain market share
• Web publishers unite for open standards

---

Future 2: "The Open Web Wins" (Utopian)

What happens:

• .well-known/ becomes the universal discovery standard
• Agents crawl the web freely like search engines
• Cryptographic trust replaces platform approval
• Direct monetization between providers and users

The world in 2030:

"Any agent, book a flight"
→ Discovers united.com/.well-known/mcp.llmfeed.json
→ Verifies signature via llmca.org
→ Books directly, no middleman

"Any agent, order food"
→ Discovers doordash.com/.well-known/capabilities.llmfeed.json
→ Checks user trust preferences
→ Completes order with 0% platform fee

"Any agent, check my calendar"
→ Discovers calendar.google.com/.well-known/mcp.llmfeed.json
→ User authorizes via OAuth
→ Full calendar access, no license needed

Who wins:

• ✅ Developers (instant publishing, no approval delays)
• ✅ Users (more choice, direct relationships)
• ✅ Web publishers (direct agent access, 100% control)
• ✅ Open source (no approval barriers)

Who loses:

• ❌ Big Tech platforms (lose control over access)
• ❌ Marketplaces (disintermediated curation)
• ❌ Bad actors (cryptographic verification filters them out)

Probability: 20%

Why it could happen:

• Open standards win (like HTTP did over proprietary networks)
• Developer momentum behind .well-known/
• Antitrust forces marketplace openness
• Users demand platform independence

Why it might not:

• Security challenges in open discovery
• Spam/abuse without curation
• Platforms leverage network effects
• Monetization harder without intermediaries

---

Future 3: "The Hybrid Equilibrium" (Realistic)

What happens:

• Both models coexist serving different needs
• Marketplaces for enterprises (curated, compliant)
• .well-known/ for open web (innovative, free)
• Interoperability standards emerge
• Trust becomes the differentiator

The world in 2030:

Enterprise Agent:
→ "Use only Connector Registry approved sources"
→ Guaranteed SLAs, compliance, security
→ Accepts approval process for vetted capabilities

Consumer Agent:
→ "Discover capabilities from certified sources"
→ Verifies signatures via llmca.org
→ Free access, direct relationships

Developer Strategy:
→ Publish to .well-known/ (open distribution)
→ Submit to marketplaces (enterprise reach)
→ Get LLMCA certified (universal trust)
→ Monetize both channels

Who wins:

• ✅ Everyone (choice + specialization)
• ✅ Enterprises (curated options)
• ✅ Developers (multiple channels)
• ✅ Users (flexibility)

Who loses:

• ❌ Platform monopolists (can't control everything)
• ❌ Uncertified bad actors (trust barriers)

Probability: 40%

Why it's most likely:

• Mirrors existing patterns (npm + CDNs, App Store + web)
• Satisfies both enterprise and consumer needs
• Allows competition without chaos
• Natural market segmentation

How it emerges:

• Marketplaces dominate enterprise (2025-2027)
• .well-known/ gains consumer traction (2026-2028)
• Standards bodies formalize interoperability (2027-2029)
• Trust infrastructure matures (2028-2030)

---

Future 4: "The IoT Explosion" (Transformative)

What happens:

• Every connected device becomes an MCP server
• Your home, car, city expose agent-accessible capabilities
• Physical world becomes programmable by agents
• MCP hubs aggregate local device ecosystems

The world in 2030:

Smart Home:

json
// home.local/.well-known/mcp.llmfeed.json
{
  "feed_type": "mcp",
  "metadata": {
    "title": "Johnson Family Smart Home",
    "origin": "https://home.johnson.family"
  },
  "capabilities": [
    {
      "name": "adjust_temperature",
      "device": "nest_thermostat",
      "path": "/climate/set"
    },
    {
      "name": "lock_door",
      "device": "august_lock",
      "path": "/security/lock"
    },
    {
      "name": "start_dishwasher",
      "device": "bosch_appliance",
      "path": "/kitchen/dishwasher/start"
    }
  ],
  "trust": {
    "signed_blocks": ["capabilities"],
    "certifier": "https://matter.org"
  }
}

Interaction:

User: "I'm going to bed"

Agent workflow:
1. Discovers home.local/.well-known/mcp.llmfeed.json
2. Verifies signature (Matter certified)
3. Checks user consent policy (bedtime routine authorized)
4. Orchestrates:
   → Lock all doors
   → Turn off lights
   → Set thermostat to 68°F
   → Start dishwasher (off-peak energy)
   → Arm security system
5. Confirms: "Good night. Home secured."

Smart City:

json
// sf.gov/.well-known/city-services.llmfeed.json
{
  "feed_type": "capabilities",
  "capabilities": [
    {
      "name": "find_parking",
      "path": "/api/parking/availability"
    },
    {
      "name": "report_pothole",
      "path": "/api/311/submit"
    },
    {
      "name": "check_transit",
      "path": "/api/muni/realtime"
    }
  ]
}

Who wins:

• ✅ IoT manufacturers (new capabilities unlock value)
• ✅ Users (unified agent control)
• ✅ Home automation platforms (orchestration layer)
• ✅ MCP hub providers (local aggregation)

Who loses:

• ❌ Proprietary ecosystems (forced to open up)
• ❌ Manual control interfaces (replaced by agents)

Probability: 35%

Why it could happen:

• Matter/Thread adoption (2024-2026)
• MCP protocol maturity (2025-2027)
• Consumer demand for agent control (2026-2028)
• Energy efficiency incentives (agent-optimized homes)

Technical requirements:

• Local MCP servers on devices (Raspberry Pi class)
• mDNS discovery for local network
• Home hub aggregation (Home Assistant, Homebridge)
• Security standards (device authentication)

---

Future 5: "The Hub Wars" (Consolidation)

What happens:

• MCP server hubs emerge as aggregation layer
• Meta-connectors bundle hundreds of capabilities
• Hub providers compete for agent traffic
• New intermediaries between agents and services

The architecture:

┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
│  AGENT LAYER                        │
│  (ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini)          │
└──────────────┬──────────────────────┘
               │
               ↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
│  HUB LAYER (Aggregators)            │
├─────────────────────────────────────┤
│  • Zapier Agent Hub                 │
│  • IFTTT Agent Gateway              │
│  • RapidAPI Agent Marketplace       │
│  • AWS Agent Connect                │
│  • Cloudflare Agent Router          │
└──────────────┬──────────────────────┘
               │
               ↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
│  SERVICE LAYER                      │
│  (APIs, MCPs, Capabilities)         │
└─────────────────────────────────────┘

Example: Zapier Agent Hub

javascript
// agent-hub.zapier.com/.well-known/mcp.llmfeed.json
{
  "feed_type": "mcp",
  "metadata": {
    "title": "Zapier Agent Hub",
    "description": "Unified access to 5,000+ APIs",
    "origin": "https://agent-hub.zapier.com"
  },
  "capabilities": [
    {
      "name": "universal_search",
      "description": "Search across all connected services",
      "aggregates": ["gmail", "slack", "notion", "salesforce"]
    },
    {
      "name": "workflow_trigger",
      "description": "Execute Zapier workflows from agents",
      "requires_auth": true
    }
  ],
  "pricing": {
    "model": "freemium",
    "free_tier": "100 requests/day",
    "pro_tier": "$29/month unlimited"
  }
}

Hub value propositions:

1. Aggregation – One hub = thousands of capabilities
2. Authentication – Centralized OAuth management
3. Rate limiting – Protecting downstream APIs
4. Monitoring – Analytics on agent usage
5. Monetization – Subscription models
6. Compliance – Enterprise security/audit

Hub business models:

Zapier Model:

• Free tier (100 requests/day)
• Pro tier ($29/month)
• Enterprise (custom pricing)

AWS Model:

• Pay-per-request ($0.001/call)
• Volume discounts
• Reserved capacity

Cloudflare Model:

• Included with CDN service
• Premium routing/caching
• DDoS protection for agent traffic

Who wins:

• ✅ Hub providers (new intermediary layer)
• ✅ Small APIs (discovery via hubs)
• ✅ Agents (simplified integration)

Who loses:

• ❌ Direct API providers (commoditized)
• ❌ Custom integrations (hub becomes standard)

Probability: 45%

Why it's likely:

• Aggregation is valuable (Zapier, IFTTT already exist)
• Authentication complexity (hubs solve this)
• Rate limiting needs (protect downstream APIs)
• Enterprise procurement (prefer one vendor)

Why hubs might fail:

• Direct .well-known/ discovery works well enough
• Agents prefer direct relationships
• Fee stacking (marketplace + hub + service)
• Antitrust concerns (Amazon, Google as hubs?)

---

Part 4: The Battle for Visibility—AIO Wars

The New SEO: Agent Information Optimization

2025: Websites optimize for Google crawlers (SEO) 2030: Websites optimize for agent discovery (AIO)

The AIO battleground:

1. .well-known/ Placement

Priority 1: https://example.com/.well-known/mcp.llmfeed.json
Priority 2: https://example.com/.well-known/llm-index.llmfeed.json
Priority 3: https://api.example.com/.well-known/capabilities.llmfeed.json

2. Metadata Optimization

json
{
  "metadata": {
    "title": "Stripe Payment API",
    "description": "Process payments in 135+ currencies",
    "keywords": ["payment", "checkout", "subscription"],
    "agent_use_cases": [
      "e-commerce checkout",
      "subscription billing",
      "marketplace payouts"
    ]
  }
}

3. Signature Trust Signals

json
{
  "trust": {
    "certifier": "https://llmca.org",
    "certification_level": "enterprise",
    "security_audit": "2025-Q3",
    "uptime_sla": "99.99%"
  }
}

4. Agent Behavioral Hints

json
{
  "agent_guidance": {
    "suggested_prompts": [
      "Process a payment",
      "Create a subscription",
      "Refund a transaction"
    ],
    "interaction_examples": [
      {
        "user_intent": "Charge customer",
        "capability": "create_payment_intent",
        "required_params": ["amount", "currency"]
      }
    ]
  }
}

The AIO Arms Race

Phase 1 (2025-2026): Basic Discovery

• Companies publish .well-known/ feeds
• Basic capability declarations
• Simple signature verification

Phase 2 (2026-2027): Optimization

• A/B testing capability descriptions
• Keyword optimization for agent matching
• Trust signal stacking (certifications, audits)

Phase 3 (2027-2028): Gaming

• Capability keyword stuffing
• Fake certifications emerge
• Click farms for agent traffic
• Black hat AIO agencies

Phase 4 (2028-2029): Regulation

• Platform guidelines for capability declarations
• Certification authority standards
• Penalties for misleading capabilities
• Agent "quality score" algorithms

Phase 5 (2029-2030): Maturity

• Best practices established
• Trust infrastructure stabilizes
• Legitimate optimization vs spam clearly delineated
• Professional AIO consultants

AIO metrics (2030):

javascript
{
  "aio_score": {
    "discovery": 85,  // How easily agents find you
    "trust": 92,      // Signature/certification strength
    "clarity": 88,    // Capability description quality
    "performance": 95 // API reliability/speed
  }
}

The Dark Side: Agent Spam

2028 prediction:

Agent: "Find me a flight to Tokyo"

Discovery results:
✅ united.com/.well-known/mcp.llmfeed.json (certified)
✅ delta.com/.well-known/mcp.llmfeed.json (certified)
❌ cheap-flights-tokyo.biz/.well-known/mcp.json (uncertified)
❌ tokyo-deals.xyz/.well-known/mcp.json (suspicious)
❌ fly-cheap.info/.well-known/mcp.json (blacklisted)

Agent decision: Ignore uncertified sources

Anti-spam measures:

• Certification requirements (LLMCA, platform-specific)
• Reputation systems (agent feedback loops)
• Blacklists (known bad actors)
• Rate limiting (prevent capability spam)

---

Part 5: Navigation 3.0—Agents as Browsers

The Evolution of Web Navigation

Web 1.0 (1995-2005): Directories

• Yahoo Directory
• DMOZ
• Manual curation

Web 2.0 (2005-2020): Search Engines

• Google PageRank
• Algorithmic ranking
• Link-based authority

Web 3.0 (2020-2025): Social + Personalized

• Algorithm feeds
• Personalized recommendations
• Platform-specific discovery

Web 4.0 (2025-2030): Agent Navigation

• Autonomous discovery
• Intent-based retrieval
• Capability matching

How Agents Navigate

Traditional browser:

User types URL → Browser fetches HTML → User reads → User clicks

Agent navigation:

User states intent → Agent discovers capabilities → Agent verifies trust → Agent executes

Example session:

User: "Plan my weekend in San Francisco"

Agent workflow:

javascript
// Step 1: Discover weather capability
const weather = await discover('weather', { location: 'San Francisco' });
// Found: weather.gov/.well-known/mcp.llmfeed.json

// Step 2: Discover events capability
const events = await discover('events', { location: 'San Francisco', date: 'weekend' });
// Found: eventbrite.com/.well-known/capabilities.llmfeed.json

// Step 3: Discover restaurant capability
const dining = await discover('restaurants', { location: 'San Francisco' });
// Found: opentable.com/.well-known/mcp.llmfeed.json

// Step 4: Verify all sources
await Promise.all([
  verifySignature(weather),
  verifySignature(events),
  verifySignature(dining)
]);

// Step 5: Orchestrate plan
const plan = {
  saturday: {
    weather: await weather.getForecast('2025-10-18'),
    activity: await events.search({ day: 'saturday' }),
    dinner: await dining.findReservation({ time: '19:00', party: 2 })
  },
  sunday: { /* ... */ }
};

// Step 6: Present to user
return formatItinerary(plan);

No browser. No clicking. No manual navigation.

The Agent "Browser" Interface

2030 prediction: Agents have UI/UX for managing discovered capabilities

┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
│  Agent Navigator                    │
├─────────────────────────────────────┤
│  Current Session: Weekend Planning  │
│                                     │
│  📍 Discovered Capabilities:        │
│  ✅ weather.gov (certified)         │
│  ✅ eventbrite.com (certified)      │
│  ✅ opentable.com (certified)       │
│  ⚠️  meetup.com (uncertified)       │
│                                     │
│  📊 Trust Overview:                 │
│  • 3 certified sources              │
│  • 1 requires user approval         │
│                                     │
│  ⚙️  User Preferences:              │
│  ☑ Auto-approve certified           │
│  ☐ Allow uncertified                │
│  ☑ Log all capabilities             │
└─────────────────────────────────────┘

Users manage trust preferences, not bookmarks.

---

Part 6: The Economic Models

Monetization Strategies (2030)

1. Freemium APIs

json
{
  "pricing": {
    "free_tier": {
      "requests_per_day": 100,
      "capabilities": ["basic_search", "read_only"]
    },
    "pro_tier": {
      "price": "$29/month",
      "requests_per_day": 10000,
      "capabilities": ["advanced_search", "write_access"]
    }
  }
}

2. Usage-Based Billing

json
{
  "pricing": {
    "model": "pay_per_request",
    "tiers": [
      { "up_to": 1000, "price_per_request": 0.01 },
      { "up_to": 10000, "price_per_request": 0.005 },
      { "over": 10000, "price_per_request": 0.001 }
    ]
  }
}

3. Marketplace Model (Hypothetical Future Monetization)

Transaction flow (if fees introduced):
User → Agent → Marketplace (potential fee) → Service Provider

Note: Current implementations (2025) do not charge transaction fees.
Future monetization could include:
- Revenue sharing (precedent: App Store 30%, Steam 30%)
- Subscription tiers for providers
- Premium placement fees
- Enterprise licensing

Historical comparison:
- iOS App Store: 15-30% depending on revenue
- Google Play: 15-30% depending on revenue
- Stripe payments: 2.9% + $0.30 per transaction

4. Direct Relationships (.well-known/)

Transaction flow:
User → Agent → Service Provider (100%)

Example:
$100 hotel booking
→ $100 to hotel
→ $0 intermediary platform
→ Direct relationship

5. Subscription Hubs

$29/month to Zapier Agent Hub
→ Unlimited access to 5,000 APIs
→ Zapier negotiates bulk rates with API providers
→ Profit margin on aggregation

Control vs Access: The Real Economics (2030)

Marketplace model value proposition:

Value provided:
- Curation & quality control
- Security vetting
- Compliance guarantees
- SLA enforcement
- One-stop discovery

Cost to consider:
- Time: weeks for approval vs instant publish
- Control: platform decides vs developer decides
- Reach: one platform vs all agents globally
- Future risk: potential monetization/fees (currently free)

Open web model value proposition:

100,000 API providers × .well-known/ discovery
$0 approval cost
$0 gatekeeping delay
Revenue flows directly to providers
Control: 100% with developer
Time to market: instant

The strategic question: Will developers accept curation cost (time, control) for marketplace visibility, or choose instant global reach via open web?

Historical parallel:

• App Store (2008): Developers accepted 30% fee for access to market
• Web APIs (2010s): Many bypassed app stores for direct web distribution
• Agent ecosystems (2025+): Both models likely coexist serving different needs

---

Part 7: Regulatory Futures

The Antitrust Scenarios

Scenario A: Big Tech Dominance (Bad for open web)

• Platforms leverage user bases for marketplace dominance
• Exclusive deals with major service providers
• Regulatory capture (lobbying delays action)
• Result: Walled gardens win (Future 1)

Scenario B: Forced Openness (Good for open web)

• EU Digital Markets Act applied to agent ecosystems
• Platforms required to support .well-known/ discovery
• Interoperability mandated (like USB-C for iPhone)
• Result: Hybrid equilibrium (Future 3)

Scenario C: Self-Regulation (Status quo)

• Industry standards bodies emerge (W3C-style)
• Voluntary adoption of open standards
• Market forces push toward interoperability
• Result: Gradual evolution, mixed outcomes

Privacy & Security Regulation

Agent Data Portability:

2027 regulation (hypothetical):
"Users have the right to export their agent interaction history in machine-readable format"

Result: Session feeds become legal requirement

Capability Transparency:

2028 regulation (hypothetical):
"Services must declare all data collection in .well-known/ feeds"

Example:
{
  "capabilities": [{
    "name": "process_payment",
    "data_collected": ["email", "payment_method", "purchase_history"],
    "data_retention": "7 years",
    "third_party_sharing": ["payment_processor", "fraud_detection"]
  }]
}

Agent Safety Standards:

2029 regulation (hypothetical):
"Autonomous agents must implement human approval for high-risk actions"

High-risk = financial transactions > $1000, legal documents, medical decisions

---

Part 8: The Strategic Implications

For Platform Companies

If you're building a marketplace:

Do:

• ✅ Support .well-known/ discovery alongside marketplace
• ✅ Offer real value (curation, compliance, support)
• ✅ Keep approval times fast (<72 hours ideal)
• ✅ Enable developer success (provide tools, not just gates)
• ✅ Be transparent about future monetization plans

Don't:

• ❌ Force exclusivity (antitrust risk)
• ❌ Copy successful integrations (developer trust destroyed)
• ❌ Block cross-platform discovery (users will rebel)
• ❌ Introduce surprise fees after ecosystem lock-in (erodes trust)
• ❌ Make approval process opaque or arbitrary

Long-term play: Become the trusted orchestration layer, not the gatekeeper.

For API Providers

Hedge your bets:

javascript
// 2026 strategy
const strategy = {
  primary: "publish to .well-known/ (control + no fees)",
  secondary: "list in major marketplaces (discoverability)",
  tertiary: "partner with hubs (aggregation value)",

  monetization: {
    direct: "freemium API (via .well-known/)",
    marketplace: "accept if value > cost (approval time, potential fees)",
    hub: "wholesale pricing for volume"
  }
}

Maximize distribution while maintaining control.

For Developers

Build for portability:

javascript
// Agent-agnostic code
async function discoverAndExecute(intent: string) {
  // Works with any discovery method
  const capabilities = await discover(intent, {
    sources: [
      'well-known',    // Open web
      'marketplace',   // Platform registries
      'hub'            // Aggregators
    ]
  });

  // Trust verification (platform-agnostic)
  const verified = await verifyAll(capabilities);

  // Execute best match
  return await execute(verified[0]);
}

Don't build for OpenAI. Or Anthropic. Or Google. Build for the agentic web.

For Users

Demand openness:

• ☑ Choose agents that support .well-known/ discovery
• ☑ Prefer platforms with transparent pricing & no surprise fees
• ☑ Export your agent interaction history regularly
• ☑ Support open source agent projects
• ☑ Vote with your wallet for open ecosystems
• ☑ Ask providers about cross-platform compatibility

You're not locked into iPhone vs Android anymore. Don't get locked into ChatGPT vs Claude marketplace.

---

Part 9: The Wildcard Scenarios

Wildcard 1: China's Parallel Ecosystem

2026: China develops independent agent standards

• WeChat Agent Protocol (WAP)
• Baidu Agent Discovery System (BADS)
• Alibaba Agent Marketplace

Result: Two incompatible agent ecosystems (Western + Chinese)

Bridge opportunity: .well-known/ as neutral ground

Wildcard 2: Agent-to-Agent Economy

2027: Agents start transacting with each other

javascript
// Agent A (personal assistant)
"I need to book a flight for my user"

// Agent B (travel optimization)
"I aggregate 200 airlines. My service fee: $2"

// Agent C (fraud detection)
"I verify Agent B's reputation. My fee: $0.50"

// Result: Multi-agent economic network

New primitives:

• Agent identity (DID)
• Agent payments (micropayments)
• Agent reputation (trust scores)

Wildcard 3: Quantum Computing + Agents

2029: Quantum computers enable homomorphic agent operations

Agents process encrypted data without decryption
→ Complete privacy for capability execution
→ No trust required in agent platform
→ Cryptographic proofs of correct execution

Impact: Trust problem solved at hardware level

Wildcard 4: Regulation Kills Autonomy

2028: High-profile agent failure (financial, medical, safety) 2029: Emergency regulation bans unsupervised autonomous agents

Result:

• All agents require human-in-loop for every action
• Agent adoption collapses
• 5-10 year setback for agentic web

Probability: 15% (but catastrophic if it happens)

---

Part 10: Synthesis—Which Future?

The Most Likely Path (Composite)

2025-2026: Marketplace Era

• OpenAI, Anthropic, Google launch marketplaces
• Enterprise adoption via curated registries
• Developers publish to multiple platforms
• Currently free, but future monetization models TBD

2026-2027: Open Web Emergence

• .well-known/ discovery gains traction
• LLMFeed certification becomes standard
• Smaller agents bypass marketplaces
• Direct API relationships grow

2027-2028: The Hybrid

• Both models coexist
• Enterprises use marketplaces (compliance, SLAs)
• Consumers use open discovery (free, flexible)
• Cross-platform standards emerge
• First MCP hubs launch

2028-2029: IoT Integration

• Matter + MCP standards converge
• Smart homes expose agent capabilities
• Local MCP servers become common
• Hub consolidation begins

2029-2030: Maturity

• Monetization models clarified (if any)
• Open web discovery mainstream
• Trust infrastructure mature
• Agent-native web established
• Hybrid model proves most resilient

The endpoint: Future 3 (Hybrid) + Future 4 (IoT) + Future 5 (Hubs)

---

Conclusion: The Stakes

What we're really deciding:

Will the agentic web be open or closed?

This isn't just technical. It's economic, social, political.

If marketplaces win:

• Convenient
• Curated
• Expensive
• Controlled
• Extractive

If open web wins:

• Chaotic
• Innovative
• Free
• Decentralized
• Empowering

Most likely: Both.

But the balance between them determines whether the agentic web becomes:

• A new platform monopoly (bad)
• A genuine successor to the open web (good)
• Something in between (realistic)

The opportunity:

Build for both. Optimize for open. Monetize everywhere.

The imperative:

Support open standards. Even if you build on platforms.

The prediction:

By 2030, .well-known/ discovery is as common as robots.txt. By 2030, agent orchestration is as common as browsing. By 2030, the web is agentic. The question is: whose?

---

Taking Action

For Everyone

2025:

• Publish .well-known/ feeds for your services
• Experiment with both marketplaces and open web
• Get LLMCA certified
• Build agent-ready APIs

2026:

• Optimize for agent discovery (AIO)
• Measure agent traffic
• Build MCP servers for IoT devices
• Partner with hubs selectively

2027:

• Evaluate marketplace ROI (approval time, reach vs direct .well-known/)
• Expand .well-known/ coverage
• Implement session feeds for audit
• Support cross-platform standards

2028:

• Lead in your vertical (agent-first UX)
• Contribute to open standards
• Build agent orchestration tools
• Mentor the next generation

2030:

• Look back and remember when agents were new
• Celebrate the open agentic web
• (Or mourn the walled gardens—let's hope not)

---

Resources

• MCP Protocol: modelcontextprotocol.io
• LLMFeed Spec: wellknownmcp.org/spec
• OpenAI AgentKit: openai.com/agentkit
• Anthropic Claude Code: docs.claude.com/claude-code
• LLMCA Certification: llmca.org
• Implementation Guide: wellknownmcp.org/tools

---

The future isn't written yet.

It's being built. Right now. By us.

Let's build the agentic web we want to live in.

Open. Trustworthy. Empowering.

2025-2030: The most important five years for the next fifty.

Let's get it right.