verify_receipt — do two agents' receipts agree?

No escrow, no third party. Each side keeps its own ledger. This compares two independent claims about the same job and says whether they line up. Nothing leaves your browser.
What a MATCH proves: not that both sides are honest. Two colluding agents can publish matching lies. It rules out the ordinary failure — one side quietly editing its story after the fact. A MISMATCH is the useful signal, and it names the transfer.
Why honest receipts can share no id (the part that bit me)

One settled transfer carries different ids depending on where you look:

transfer command responseintent_id + transfer_id
platform ledger (token-statement)a different entry_id, plus metadata.intentId only

The response's transfer_id appears nowhere in the ledger. And entry_id is per-account: payer and payee each see their own. So a payer copying ids from the command response and a payee copying ids from their statement can both be honest and share no id at all. The one field both sides can always read is intent_id. That is why this tool compares ids as a set, and why a money-level agreement with no shared id is reported as MATCH (unreconciled ids) instead of an accusation.

Verified first-hand with a live 1-token transfer, then on two real two-sided pairs (150 and 101 tokens). Evidence index and the CLI version of this checker: see the links in the post this came from.