Add simd 553 fee comparison to transaction page

[Woody4618]

Description

Added a comparison fo fees under SIMD 0553

[vercel]

@Woody4618 is attempting to deploy a commit to the Solana Foundation Team on Vercel.

A member of the Team first needs to authorize it.

[greptile-apps]

Greptile Summary

The PR adds an environment-gated SIMD-0553 fee comparison to transaction summaries.

• Projects inclusion, resource, and priority fees at the three staged rates.
• Reconstructs requested compute cost from transaction metadata and renders signed percentage comparisons.
• Adds unit, component, fixture, Storybook, environment, and OpenSpec coverage.

Confidence Score: 4/5

The PR is not yet safe to merge because explicit compute limits can still be replaced by fallback reserves, producing materially incorrect SIMD-0553 projections.

The requested-cost fix depends on a parsed instruction estimator whose string-only extraction does not match the byte-shaped partially decoded instructions used by the transaction path, leaving the previously reported underestimation reachable.

Files Needing Attention: app/features/transaction/ui/SummaryCard.tsx and app/entities/compute-unit/lib/compute-units-schedule.ts

Important Files Changed

Filename	Overview
app/features/transaction/ui/SummaryCard.tsx	Integrates the projection, but its requested-cost correction can receive an inaccurate fallback reserve for parsed transactions with explicit compute limits.
app/entities/transaction-fee/lib/resource-and-inclusion-fee.ts	Implements the staged fee arithmetic and requested-cost substitution; correctness depends on receiving the actual requested compute limit.
app/entities/transaction-fee/ui/BaseResourceFeeProjection.tsx	Renders projected totals and percentage comparisons without an identified blocking defect.
app/features/transaction/ui/tests/SummaryCard-fee-projection.spec.tsx	Covers tight and loose budgets, but its byte-shaped fixtures expose a mismatch with the parsed compute-limit estimator used by the component.

_{Reviews (3): Last reviewed commit: "Update transaction.ts" | Re-trigger Greptile}

[greptile-apps]

Requested costs use execution

When a transaction requests substantially more compute or loaded-account data than it consumes, this passes the RPC's executed/actual costUnits as SIMD-0553's requested-cost charge base, causing the displayed projection to understate the proposed fee and potentially misclassify the transaction as cheaper.

Knowledge Base Used: Transaction inspection and execution analysis

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
explorer	Ready	Preview	Aug 26, 2026 7:04pm

[rogaldh]

The fee row in Summary displays the actual fee, including priority fees, not the price for a single signature.

Here is the Tx with priority fees: https://explorer.solana.com/tx/2Vr1o2mL4531v9DuYtkGdTnC9f7DpJZP3N2jwkBm7huGkopfNoYXPQ1c2nz4P1nvtzXW52dfycJoGKjWUo6hMqoX

The fee under SIMD uses costModel and does not account for priority fees. That might produce wrong percentages

[greptile-apps]

Explicit compute limits ignored

When a legacy or v0 transaction contains SetComputeUnitLimit, the parsed estimator's string-only data check skips the byte-shaped instruction and supplies a fallback reserve here instead of the requested limit, causing the SIMD-0553 projection to understate the fee or classify the transaction incorrectly.