Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
When a root staker unstakes, their entitlement/watermark within their chosen validator's basket is preserved, but it stays in the basket, and the staker has to know on their own to make a second, separate call to claim it. When a staker unstakes, the protocol rebases the claim so that nothing is lost; if you exit completely, it records "we owe you this, even though you now hold nothing." The problem is that being owed and being paid have been separated, and nothing closes the gap for the user, creating friction both per-user and in third-party integrators at scale.
A staker who reduces or ends their root position walks away with their principal and leaves their rewards sitting in a protocol-owned account, with nothing in the UI or RPC prompting them to collect it. There is no error, no warning, no event, and no balance change that would make them curious. The rewards are simply somewhere else, under an account they have never heard of, waiting for a call they have no reason to know exists. Someone who unstakes because they are leaving, consolidating, moving to another validator, taking profit, etc is exactly the person least likely to come back and run one more transaction. This also greatly impacts upstream interfaces from large service providers such as MEXC, BitGo, Coinbase, etc who do not have native awareness of basket processes to represent yield, holdings, or interface steps to accomplish Bittensor-style basket claims outside of their native custodial wallet operations.
The longer they stay in that state, the more it depends on incidental details continuing to hold. The "we owe you
nothing" record is only reachable because of a lookup list that happens to still mention the validator, and because of a cleanup routine that may be disabled. Neither of those is load-bearing by design. A staker in that state is fine today and fine tomorrow, but they are relying on things nobody intended them to rely on with friction for that representation at scale for critical external integrations into the eco. So we have a class of users who are owed real assets, cannot see it, were never told to ask for it, and whose ability to ask for it rests on technicality. That is the thing to fix.
Describe the solution you'd like
When a root staker unstakes, their share of the validator's beta basket should be realized in proportion to how much of their position they unstaked. Unstake 40% of your root stake, realize your stake plus 40% of your accrued basket rewards as immediately liquid total TAO. Unstake everything, realize everything in TAO and leave nothing behind. Today an unstake realizes none of it; the entitlement is preserved, but it stays in the basket, and the staker has to know on their own to make a second, separate call to collect it.
Unstaking should settle up, in proportion:
Alice has 100 TAO staked on root with validator V. Over several weeks her share of V's basket grows to be worth 10 TAO.
Today, Alice unstakes any amount of TAO, Alice receives that TAO, yet the 10 TAO of watermarked rewards remain in escrow, unclaimed and unprompted.
Ideally, if Alice unstakes 40 TAO, Alice should receive the 40 TAO and the 40% (proportional) auto-claimed equivalent of the basket rewards, in this case 4 TAO, for a total immediate liquid 44 TAO. If Alice unstakes all 100 TAO, Alice should expect to receive the 100 TAO plus an auto-claim of the 10 TAO basket portion for a total immediate liquid 110 TAO.
Settling only on a complete exit would be simpler, and it would close the worst case. But it does not solve for critical external integrators and leaves a strange middle where a staker who reduces from 100 TAO to 1 TAO would keep an entitlement sized for their old position hanging off a tiny remaining stake, making a large claim behind a small position, still invisible, still needing a separate call. It also opens up that claim to other chain operations such as subnet dissolution, key swaps, etc.
Describe alternatives you've considered
No response
Additional context
No response
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
When a root staker unstakes, their entitlement/watermark within their chosen validator's basket is preserved, but it stays in the basket, and the staker has to know on their own to make a second, separate call to claim it. When a staker unstakes, the protocol rebases the claim so that nothing is lost; if you exit completely, it records "we owe you this, even though you now hold nothing." The problem is that being owed and being paid have been separated, and nothing closes the gap for the user, creating friction both per-user and in third-party integrators at scale.
A staker who reduces or ends their root position walks away with their principal and leaves their rewards sitting in a protocol-owned account, with nothing in the UI or RPC prompting them to collect it. There is no error, no warning, no event, and no balance change that would make them curious. The rewards are simply somewhere else, under an account they have never heard of, waiting for a call they have no reason to know exists. Someone who unstakes because they are leaving, consolidating, moving to another validator, taking profit, etc is exactly the person least likely to come back and run one more transaction. This also greatly impacts upstream interfaces from large service providers such as MEXC, BitGo, Coinbase, etc who do not have native awareness of basket processes to represent yield, holdings, or interface steps to accomplish Bittensor-style basket claims outside of their native custodial wallet operations.
The longer they stay in that state, the more it depends on incidental details continuing to hold. The "we owe you
nothing" record is only reachable because of a lookup list that happens to still mention the validator, and because of a cleanup routine that may be disabled. Neither of those is load-bearing by design. A staker in that state is fine today and fine tomorrow, but they are relying on things nobody intended them to rely on with friction for that representation at scale for critical external integrations into the eco. So we have a class of users who are owed real assets, cannot see it, were never told to ask for it, and whose ability to ask for it rests on technicality. That is the thing to fix.
Describe the solution you'd like
When a root staker unstakes, their share of the validator's beta basket should be realized in proportion to how much of their position they unstaked. Unstake 40% of your root stake, realize your stake plus 40% of your accrued basket rewards as immediately liquid total TAO. Unstake everything, realize everything in TAO and leave nothing behind. Today an unstake realizes none of it; the entitlement is preserved, but it stays in the basket, and the staker has to know on their own to make a second, separate call to collect it.
Unstaking should settle up, in proportion:
Alice has 100 TAO staked on root with validator V. Over several weeks her share of V's basket grows to be worth 10 TAO.
Today, Alice unstakes any amount of TAO, Alice receives that TAO, yet the 10 TAO of watermarked rewards remain in escrow, unclaimed and unprompted.
Ideally, if Alice unstakes 40 TAO, Alice should receive the 40 TAO and the 40% (proportional) auto-claimed equivalent of the basket rewards, in this case 4 TAO, for a total immediate liquid 44 TAO. If Alice unstakes all 100 TAO, Alice should expect to receive the 100 TAO plus an auto-claim of the 10 TAO basket portion for a total immediate liquid 110 TAO.
Settling only on a complete exit would be simpler, and it would close the worst case. But it does not solve for critical external integrators and leaves a strange middle where a staker who reduces from 100 TAO to 1 TAO would keep an entitlement sized for their old position hanging off a tiny remaining stake, making a large claim behind a small position, still invisible, still needing a separate call. It also opens up that claim to other chain operations such as subnet dissolution, key swaps, etc.
Describe alternatives you've considered
No response
Additional context
No response