[High] Design an ecosystem grants program funded by the protocol treasury

[james2177]

Description: Design a specific grants program — one concrete allocation category the community treasury-spending governance process (issue #117) would authorize — funding external contributors building complementary tooling on top of intent_settlement/proof_registry (indexer forks, monitoring dashboards, solver bots, integration libraries) rather than funding solver bonds or core-team runway.

Problem Statement & Context: Issue #37's treasury contract and issue #117's spending-governance process both deliberately avoid dictating any specific spending allocation, correctly treating that as a downstream community decision. This issue makes that decision concrete for one plausible, well-precedented category: ecosystem tooling grants, mirroring how this very repository already contains multiple pieces of reference/example tooling (indexer/reference-indexer.js, examples/risk_aware_solver_bot.py) explicitly built to be extended by others — a grants program is a natural mechanism to fund exactly that kind of extension work at a scale beyond what any single contributor is likely to do unpaid.

Scope & Acceptance Criteria:

• A docs/ecosystem-grants-program.md defining scope (what kinds of tooling qualify — explicitly including, as examples, forks/extensions of indexer/reference-indexer.js and examples/risk_aware_solver_bot.py), an application format, a review/approval process consistent with issue Add a view listing all currently allowed dst_tokens #117's general spending-governance process, and a reporting requirement for grant recipients (e.g., a completion writeup, consistent with this repo's evident preference for documented rationale everywhere else).
• Explicit dependency on and consistency with issue Add a view listing all currently allowed dst_tokens #117: this program's approval flow must route through whatever process issue Add a view listing all currently allowed dst_tokens #117 establishes, not invent a parallel one.
• Out of scope: allocating or committing any specific treasury amount to this program — that funding decision depends on issue Document the DstAllowlistEnabled-off-by-default decision for mainnet launch #37's treasury actually existing and accumulating funds, and on issue Add a view listing all currently allowed dst_tokens #117's process being adopted first; this issue delivers the program design only.

Implementation Guidelines:

1. Key files: issue Document the DstAllowlistEnabled-off-by-default decision for mainnet launch #37's treasury-contract scope, issue Add a view listing all currently allowed dst_tokens #117's spending-governance process (this program is explicitly a specific instance of that general process), indexer/reference-indexer.js and examples/risk_aware_solver_bot.py (concrete existing examples of the kind of tooling this program should be scoped to fund extensions of).
2. Keep the initial scope narrow and concrete (tooling grants only, not general marketing/business-development grants) so the program is launchable and evaluable rather than open-ended.
3. Edge cases: define how a grant applicant's proposed tooling relates to an already-open issue in this very list (e.g., someone proposing to build what issue Add a minimum slash amount floor so tiny bonds round to a zero-value slash #32's real indexer service already covers) — the program should route such overlaps back into the existing issue-board process rather than double-funding the same scope.
4. Testing: not applicable in the traditional sense — validate by drafting one realistic sample grant application (e.g., "extend indexer/reference-indexer.js into a hosted public dashboard") through the full documented process.

Definition of Done:

• docs/ecosystem-grants-program.md written, cross-referenced from issue Add a view listing all currently allowed dst_tokens #117's process document and README.md.
• Acceptance criteria met.
• PR reviewed and approved.
• Reviewed and approved.

Resources: indexer/reference-indexer.js, examples/risk_aware_solver_bot.py, issue #37 and issue #117's scope

Complexity: High (200 points)