Executing one loan request on a typical chain can require three separate tokens. The native asset for gas. A second to pay the relay service fetching the borrower's credit data. A third to compensate the keeper network triggering the callback once that data returns. That example comes from Rialo's own async execution documentation, and it describes the real operating cost of something most people would call a single transaction. Three assets to acquire, hold, monitor, and top up. Three balances to manage. Three places the workflow stalls if one runs dry at the wrong moment. This multi token tax rarely comes up because it isn't a protocol fee anyone charges. It's an emergent cost of outsourcing capability to separate networks that each needed their own economics to survive. Nobody designed it. It accumulated, one middleware layer at a time. On @RialoHQ the same workflow runs as a single async transaction. Validators query the external API through native web calls. Execution pauses and resumes without a keeper prompting it. One token, one balance, one thing to keep funded. Token design discussions usually revolve around supply schedules and distribution curves. The more useful question is how many different tokens a developer has to hold before their product works at all. For most of this industry the honest answer has been three, and nobody ever put that number in a pitch deck.