Good evening everyone and welcome those who are new.

So we’ve gotten messages on how the utility works exactly since it’s complex in a way.

Here’s the breakdown:

Pentagonal.ai is a tool that checks smart contracts for security problems before they cause damage. Think of it like a home inspector for crypto code. Before you move in, it walks through every room looking for things that could break or be broken into.

Here’s the basic idea. When someone writes a smart contract (the code that runs a crypto token or DeFi project), bugs in that code can let attackers drain all the money out of it. This has happened countless times, with billions lost. Pentagonal tries to catch those weaknesses early.

What makes it different is that it runs eight separate AI “attackers,” and each one specializes in a single way contracts get hacked. One looks for the trick where someone withdraws money before the system updates the balance. Another looks for price manipulation. Another checks whether the wrong person can gain control. They all attack the same contract at once, then combine what they found into one report that tells you how serious each problem is and how to fix it.

It does three main things:

• Builds a contract for you from a plain description, then checks it
• Checks a contract you already have on the major networks (Ethereum, Solana, BNB Chain, and others)
• Screens tokens for red flags, including honeypots, which are tokens designed so you can buy in but never sell. That part is useful for the contract digging you’ve been doing.

The cost is low. It’s five dollars per check, or forty dollars for ten. Fixing and re-checking the same contract is free.

Two things to keep in mind. First, this is fully automated with no human reviewers. AI is good at catching common coding mistakes but weak at spotting the cleverer “economic” attacks, which is often where real money gets stolen. So it’s a solid quick first pass, not a guarantee a contract is safe. Second, it’s a new and small tool, so the safety scores it gives itself aren’t independently verified. Treat a clean result as encouraging, not as proof.