Compare conflicting reports
Explain where supplied reports disagree and which differences may come from scope or method.
Explain Bitcoin Lightning channel factories and the SuperScalar protocol — scalable Lightning onboarding using shared UTXOs, Decker-Wattenhofer trees, timeout-signature trees, MuSig2, and Taproot. No soft fork required.
--- name: lightning-factory-explainer description: Explain Bitcoin Lightning channel factories and the SuperScalar protocol — scalable Lightning onboarding using shared UTXOs, Decker-Wattenhofer trees, timeout-signature trees, MuSig2, and Taproot. No soft fork required. risk: safe source: community date_added: '2026-03-03' --- ## Use this skill when - Explaining Bitcoin Lightning channel factories and scalable onboarding - Discussing the SuperScalar protocol architecture and design - Needing guidance on Decker-Wattenhofer trees, timeout-signature trees, or MuSig2 ## Do not use this skill when - The task is unrelated to Bitcoin or Lightning Network scaling - You need a different blockchain or Layer 2 outside this scope ## Instructions - Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs. - Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes. - Provide actionable steps and verification. The declared community implementation at `8144225309/SuperScalar` returned HTTP 404 on 2026-10-14. Do not treat it as a verified production implementation, funded-mainnet deployment, 400-test suite or audited watchtower. The original [SuperScalar proposal](https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/superscalar-laddered-timeout-tree-structured-decker-wattenhofer-factories/1143) is a protocol source, not proof that a similarly named repository implements it correctly. ## Purpose Expert guide for understanding Bitcoin Lightning Network channel factories and the SuperScalar protocol. Covers scalable onboarding, shared UTXOs, Decker-Wattenhofer invalidation trees, timeout-signature trees, Poon-Dryja channels, MuSig2 (BIP-327), and Taproot — all without requiring any soft fork. ## Key Topics - Lightning channel factories and multi-party channels - SuperScalar protocol architecture - Decker-Wattenhofer invalidation trees - Timeout-signature trees - MuSig2 key aggregation (BIP-327) - Taproot script trees - LSP (Lightning Service Provider) onboarding patterns - Shared UTXO management ## References - SuperScalar project: https://github.com/8144225309/SuperScalar - Website: https://SuperScalar.win - Original proposal: https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/superscalar-laddered-timeout-tree-structured-decker-wattenhofer-factories/1143 ## Example **User request:** > Explain Bitcoin Lightning channel factories and scalable onboarding. ## Limitations - Use this skill only when the task clearly matches the scope described above. - Do not treat the output as a substitute for environment-specific validation, testing, or expert review. - Stop and ask for clarification if required inputs, permissions, safety boundaries, or success criteria are missing. ## Review evidence Distinguish proposal properties from a specific implementation revision. Trace funding ownership, required signers, offline/liveness assumptions, timelock ordering, old-state invalidation, recovery artifacts, fee/bump behavior and unilateral exit under congestion. Define what N measures before stating complexity. Verify HTLC/PTLC and watchtower compatibility with actual protocol versions and test vectors; a claim of no consensus change does not establish deployability or safety. Use an isolated regtest fixture; signing, funding or broadcasting with real funds needs separate explicit authorization.--- name: lightning-factory-explainer description: Explain Bitcoin Lightning channel factories and the SuperScalar protocol — scalable Lightning onboarding using shared UTXOs, Decker-Wattenhofer trees, timeout-signature trees, MuSig2, and Taproot. No soft fork required. risk: safe source: community date_added: '2026-03-03' --- ## Use this skill when - Explaining Bitcoin Lightning channel factories and scalable onboarding - Discussing the SuperScalar protocol architecture and design - Needing guidance on Decker-Wattenhofer trees, timeout-signature trees, or MuSig2 ## Do not use this skill when - The task is unrelated to Bitcoin or Lightning Network scaling - You need a different blockchain or Layer 2 outside this scope ## Instructions - Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs. - Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes. - Provide actionable steps and verification. The declared community implementation at `8144225309/SuperScalar` returned HTTP 404 on 2026-10-14. Do not treat it as a verified production implementation, funded-mainnet deployment, 400-test suite or audited watchtower. The original [SuperScalar proposal](https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/superscalar-laddered-timeout-tree-structured-decker-wattenhofer-factories/1143) is a protocol source, not proof that a similarly named repository implements it correctly. ## Purpose Expert guide for understanding Bitcoin Lightning Network channel factories and the SuperScalar protocol. Covers scalable onboarding, shared UTXOs, Decker-Wattenhofer invalidation trees, timeout-signature trees, Poon-Dryja channels, MuSig2 (BIP-327), and Taproot — all without requiring any soft fork. ## Key Topics - Lightning channel factories and multi-party channels - SuperScalar protocol architecture - Decker-Wattenhofer invalidation trees - Timeout-signature trees - MuSig2 key aggregation (BIP-327) - Taproot script trees - LSP (Lightning Service Provider) onboarding patterns - Shared UTXO management ## References - SuperScalar project: https://github.com/8144225309/SuperScalar - Website: https://SuperScalar.win - Original proposal: https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/superscalar-laddered-timeout-tree-structured-decker-wattenhofer-factories/1143 ## Example **User request:** > Explain Bitcoin Lightning channel factories and scalable onboarding. ## Limitations - Use this skill only when the task clearly matches the scope described above. - Do not treat the output as a substitute for environment-specific validation, testing, or expert review. - Stop and ask for clarification if required inputs, permissions, safety boundaries, or success criteria are missing. ## Review evidence Distinguish proposal properties from a specific implementation revision. Trace funding ownership, required signers, offline/liveness assumptions, timelock ordering, old-state invalidation, recovery artifacts, fee/bump behavior and unilateral exit under congestion. Define what N measures before stating complexity. Verify HTLC/PTLC and watchtower compatibility with actual protocol versions and test vectors; a claim of no consensus change does not establish deployability or safety. Use an isolated regtest fixture; signing, funding or broadcasting with real funds needs separate explicit authorization.
Imported SKILL.md format for Claude Code, Codex and Cursor. Review the complete instructions and required tools before use. Package integrity checked; individual agent behavior has not been tested.