[Draft] [OBRA] Roles {Wallet} Integration Phase 2 + Pilot - Gnosis Guild

Initiative Title

Roles {Wallet} Integration Phase 2 + Pilot - Gnosis Guild


This initiative aims to bring access control to a broader range of Safe users by adding a graphical role management interface into Safe{Wallet} and enhancing the Pilot browser extension to support complex execution setups, improving overall efficiency and UX.

Aligned Strategy

Wildcard strategy

While this initiative builds upon the module work from SEP 14 , we are categorizing it under the wildcard strategy because it’s focused explicitly on improvements and integrations to the Safe{Wallet} ecosystem, as well as the innovative setups made possible only through Pilot. This initiative emerged as an opportunity resulting from our previous OBRA work, aligning with the flexible and adaptable nature of the wildcard strategy.

Funding Request

$100k USDC

If Applicable, Upfront Funding


Relation to Budget

100% of Wildcard Strategy

Metrics and KPIs

  • Increase in TVL in Safes with Roles Mod (Roles) enabled
  • Increase in Total number of Safes with Roles enabled
  • Increase in user engagement with Pilot

Initiative Description

During our previous OBRA initiative (SEP 14 ), we completed an initial integration of the Zodiac Roles Modifier into Safe{Wallet}, allowing for seamless execution of Roles transactions directly from the Safe{Wallet} transaction flow. As part of SEP 14, we enabled the creation and management of role configurations through the Zodiac Roles Safe app. Being designed for technical users, this app supports the Roles mod’s full range of capabilities and an advanced permission management workflow.

For this initiative, we want to make Roles more accessible to a broader range of users through a graphical role management interface, natively integrated into Safe{Wallet}. We already carried out research and design mockups for this extensive Phase 2 integration, which enables the user-friendly creation and editing of Roles directly in the {Wallet} settings page. In this initiative, we will develop, test, and integrate this mockup flow into the {Wallet} interface.

Additionally, during our work on Pilot, we identified improvements to be made to enhance the set of supported execution routes, including nested Safes, stacked Zodiac mods, and Safes as modules. Pilot is the execution interface for Roles but currently only supports the basic setup of EOA member → Roles mod → Safe. We plan to allow more complex setups, such as EOA owner → Safe as Role member → Roles mod → Delay mod → Safe. This enhancement will greatly improve the efficiency and UX of complex, nested Safe setups, opening up a landscape of novel configurations.

Current Status

Roles and Pilot both exist and are widely used — this initiative would expand their capabilities.


One risk is that the SEF {Wallet} team could block the Phase 2 integration of Roles into the {Wallet} interface. We have been mitigating this by gathering internal feedback and support for the initiative. Prior to kicking off the work, we would request full confirmation that all parties are on board with the initiative as described.

Timeline and Milestones

Week Focus Outcomes USDC
1-8 Design, Development, Testing User-friendly interface to create and manage Roles directly in Safe {Wallet} settings page 80.000
6-8 Development, Testing Enhanced set of supported execution routes and streamlined UX through Pilot (the execution interface for Roles) 20.000

Initiative Lead

Gnosis Guild


Gnosis Guild would assign a full pod (two engineers and one designer/PM) to this initiative for 8 weeks.

Additional Support/Resources

Feedback and confirmation of our Phase 2 design mockups to develop and complete the integration.

Implementation Dependencies

Approval from SEF {Wallet} team for the Phase 2 integration.

Discussion Thread


Hi @espina - I fully support this initiative. Adding more role features will increase the ability of Safe to play a central role in the Governance and Operations of any type of organization. Your approach of opting for a direct {wallet} integration is also the way I believe to be most valuable and sustainable. Cheers!

1 Like

Thanks for the support @LuukDAO! We definitely agree.

1 Like

Quick update on the proposal — the Safe{Wallet} team has confirmed support for the proposed Phase 2 integration and kindly offered their collaboration in managing the project.

1 Like

I am a Safe Guardian with sufficient voting power , and I believe this proposal is ready to move to a vote.

1 Like

Thanks for your detailed reponses in this thread and your presentation on the call this week. As a delegate with sufficient voting power , I consider this proposal ready to move to a vote

1 Like

As a delegate with sufficient voting power , I believe this is ready for a vote!

1 Like

Hey @auryn thanks for taking the time to review the proposal!

As defined in the governance framework,

in order to conflicts of interest (in this case, your participation in the entity of Gnosis Guild) Guardians or delegates may not approve their own proposals. Therefore, this signal is not valid for this proposal.

As a guardian with sufficient voting power (cf bh2smith.eth | SafeDAO Governance Dashboard) and I believe this proposal is ready to move to a vote.

1 Like

I am a Safe Guardian with sufficient voting power, and I believe this proposal is ready to move to a vote.

1 Like

Thank you for the proposal. We appreciate the effort you put into it. Also a thank you to the guardians taking the time to evaluate.

After discussion within the Safe{Wallet} team we would like you to reiterate on the proposal as we cannot approve it in the current state. On a high level we have 2 reasons:

  1. v1 is not yet completed and the success/impact cannot be fully assessed
  2. in the proposal for v2 itself are some details missing to properly evaluate spending the 100k you requested

On 1:

  • We would like the first proposal being fully implemented and released, gather feedback from users and see some usage/adoption numbers. As outlined in the v1 proposal we should measure/see how the metrics/KPIs set for v1 will be met:

    Which metrics and KPIs will the initiative/v1 be measured against?*

    a. Impact on governance participation (direct attributable increase in participation through tool):
    b. Increase in TVL in Safes with Roles Mod (Roles) enabled
    c. Increase in Total number of Safes with Roles enabled
    d. Increase in developer engagement with Roles

On 2:

Feedback on the current proposal/v2:

  • We would like to have more clarity overall on the concrete numbers of the current usage of roles modifier (v2) and (v1) and usage of pilot
  • Additionally we would like to see some target numbers/what you are aiming for for the metrics you provided
    • Increase in TVL in Safes with Roles Mod (Roles) enabled
    • Increase in Total number of Safes with Roles enabled
    • Increase in user engagement with Pilot
  • Could you please elaborate on a longer-term plan on how pilot will benefit Safe/ the Safe ecosystem?
  • Comment: Having predefined roles to increase accessibility for users unfamiliar with roles might be beneficial. Happy to brainstorm ideas.

Happy to give feedback on the next iteration.

Hi team, unfortunately while this proposal did receive sufficient signaling from Guardians and Delegates, as stated in the proposal and governance framework below,

this proposal was not approved as is by the Safe {Wallet} team for reasons stated above, therefore will not be moving forward to Phase 2.

You may propose again at a later sprint (earliest is Season 3, Sprint 2 on July 8th).

1 Like

Ah, right. Of course!

1 Like

Hey @chris_Safe, thanks for the feedback. We’re happy to work with you all to resolve any blockers. We had received buy-in from members of the {Wallet} team, but understand there are changes after further internal discussion.

On 1:

Phase 1 (v1) has been successfully completed and integrated into the execution flow of Safe{Wallet} (pending final Safe QA). Phase 1 and 2 are quite different in terms of outcomes, which is why the metrics and impact are not entirely relevant or a blocker. While Phase 1 focused on the execution integration, making it easy for users with Roles to execute their transactions, Phase 2 is focused on the creation and management of Roles within the Safe settings UI.

Phase 1 enabled high TVL power-users to use Roles v2 in production. Complementing this, the primary goal of Phase 2 is making Roles more accessible to a broader range of users.

On 2:

In our opinion, evaluating budget and Pilot is outside the scope of the {Wallet} team’s approval, which is primarily assessing a technical dependency/integration of Roles into the {Wallet} UI. While feedback is welcome on this as part of the discussion, this is ultimately for the SafeDAO to decide and shouldn’t be a factor in the integration approval.

We agree these metrics would be helpful for the proposal and are putting together a Dune dashboard which I can share shortly.

Target Metrics
Our primary metric here is the number of Safes with Roles Mods enabled. Our initial target is a 2x increase over the next 6 months. Currently there are 3,744.

We expect sophisticated users with high TVL to prefer the current code-based approach to managing their roles, while the native settings integration is aimed at making Roles accessible for smaller scale use cases. So we don’t expect the initiative to have a significant impact on the total value secured by Zodiac Roles Modifier.

Pilot Roadmap
We view Pilot as the optimal interface for building advanced Safe transactions, whether that be batching, complex module routing, and/or simulation. Pilot is a companion to Safe{Wallet} that makes interacting with apps a seamless experience. Ongoing development of this tool supports power users like karpatkey (over $3B Safe TVL), increases efficiency in executing transactions, and enables new Safe use cases — all directly benefiting the Safe ecosystem. Pilot has no dependencies on the Safe{Wallet} integration.

Predefined Roles
We are certainly open to predefined roles and would be happy to hear the team’s ideas around this.

1 Like

Hi @amy.sg, we’re happy to hold off to ensure we’re aligned with the {Wallet} team.

It would be helpful to understand what things require approval from the SEF vs. what can be decided on by the DAO when it comes to integrations and modifications to Safe infrastructure. Plus what criteria the approval is based on and who the points of contact are for approval of different parts of the stack. This is a gray area at the moment and would be beneficial to formalize to support more decentralization and transparency.

1 Like