RFQ quotes may be bound to a particular taker

An RFQ quote obtained for one taker may be unusable by another, even when the token pair and amount are identical. Account identity can be part of the maker's authorization, not merely a display preference.

The 0x RFQ overview explains taker-specific orders and the role of the taker request parameter. Treat this as an execution constraint when modeling the quote.

Include context in cache identity

A firm-quote cache key should include chain, token identities, amount, trade direction and the relevant taker context. A shared pair-and-amount cache can otherwise hand one user's authorization to another user's flow.

Keep anonymous indicative pricing separate from account-bound firm quotes. A public price estimate may be useful before connection, but it should not be relabeled executable when an account is selected.

Resolve contract execution deliberately

In a smart-account integration, establish which address the API expects as taker and how that maps to the contract that actually executes. Do not substitute the human signer's externally owned account simply because that address signed an operation.

Validate this topology against the provider's supported execution model. A wrapper contract can change the caller seen by settlement contracts, so a quote prepared for direct wallet execution may not transfer unchanged.

Reject stale account results

If the account changes while a quote request is in flight, discard the old response from active review. The same applies when a wallet returns a signature after the application has already switched accounts.

Test two accounts requesting the same economic trade. They may receive identical displayed prices, but the application should still preserve two separate firm-quote contexts. A matching price is not evidence that the signed authorization is interchangeable.