Skip to content

docs(kyc): align sandbox verification and onboarding docs with implemented behavior - #815

Merged
akanter merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
08-11-docs_kyc_align_sandbox_verification_and_onboarding_docs_with_implemented_behavior
Aug 11, 2026
Merged

docs(kyc): align sandbox verification and onboarding docs with implemented behavior#815
akanter merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
08-11-docs_kyc_align_sandbox_verification_and_onboarding_docs_with_implemented_behavior

Conversation

@akanter

@akanter akanter commented Aug 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

The sandbox KYC/KYB suffix documentation (shipped with #726) described a design that never made it to the implementation, and the onboarding guide predated the identity-document requirement. Every claim below was verified empirically against dev and prod (2026-08-11), including a full prod run of the fix-and-resubmit loop.

snippets/sandbox-verification.mdx

  • Individual suffixes resolve kycStatus at creation (001 PENDING / 002 REJECTED / 003 UNVERIFIED / any other APPROVED); terminal suffixes make POST /verifications return 400, so only 001 and 003 customers are submittable. The old table claimed all suffixes resolved at verification time.
  • 003 simulates a correctable provider rejection (POOR_QUALITY_DOCUMENT), not an EDD MISSING_FIELD flow — replaced the fictional edd.* example with the verified fix-and-resubmit loop (create incomplete → read errors[] → PATCH fields + upload document → resubmit → PENDING_MANUAL_REVIEW).
  • Business customers are created UNVERIFIED and resolve on submission: 002/other skip data and document validation entirely; 001/003 go through full KYB validation. Business responses use kybStatus, not kycStatus.
  • Beneficial-owner suffixes resolve when the owning business resolves via its registration-number suffix.

snippets/kyc/kyc-unregulated.mdx

  • Individual verification requires an identity document (PASSPORT single image; DRIVERS_LICENSE/NATIONAL_ID as FRONT+BACK) plus taxIdType/taxIdentifier — the guide called documents optional ("if requested") and the error example showed a proof-of-address case; swapped to the real MISSING_IDENTITY_DOCUMENT shape.
  • kycStatus starts at UNVERIFIED (guide said PENDING) and moves to PENDING on submission/hosted-flow completion.
  • fullName must parse into a given + family name; single-word names are refused by the provider at submission.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

…ented behavior

The sandbox suffix tables described a design that never shipped. Verified
against dev and prod (2026-08-11) and corrected:

- Individual suffixes resolve kycStatus AT CREATION (001 PENDING /
  002 REJECTED / 003 UNVERIFIED / other APPROVED); terminal suffixes make
  POST /verifications return 400, so only 001 and 003 are submittable.
- The 003 suffix simulates a correctable provider rejection
  (POOR_QUALITY_DOCUMENT), not an EDD MISSING_FIELD flow; replaced the
  fictional edd.* example with the verified fix-and-resubmit loop.
- Business customers are created UNVERIFIED and resolve on submission;
  002/other skip validation entirely, 001/003 go through full KYB
  validation. Responses use kybStatus.
- BO suffixes resolve when the owning business resolves via its suffix.
- Individual verification requires an identity document (PASSPORT single
  image, DRIVERS_LICENSE/NATIONAL_ID front+back) and taxIdType/taxIdentifier;
  the docs called documents optional.
- kycStatus starts UNVERIFIED (docs said PENDING).
- fullName must parse into given + family name; single-word names are
  refused at submission.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@vercel

vercel Bot commented Aug 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

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

2 Skipped Deployments
Project Deployment Actions Updated (UTC)
grid-flow-builder Ignored Ignored Preview Aug 11, 2026 2:42pm
grid-wallet-demo Ignored Ignored Preview Aug 11, 2026 2:42pm

Request Review

@mintlify

mintlify Bot commented Aug 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Preview deployment for your docs. Learn more about Mintlify Previews.

Project Status Preview Updated (UTC)
Grid 🟢 Ready View Preview Aug 11, 2026, 2:19 PM

akanter commented Aug 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

@greptile-apps

greptile-apps Bot commented Aug 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Greptile Summary

The PR updates public KYC/KYB documentation to reflect implemented status transitions, identity-document requirements, sandbox suffix behavior, and the correct fix-and-resubmit flow.

  • Corrects individual and business sandbox verification outcome tables.
  • Adds production-aligned identity-document and customer-data requirements.
  • Documents KYC status transitions and full-name requirements.
  • Replaces the fictional EDD example with a sandbox remediation workflow.

Confidence Score: 4/5

The PR appears safe to merge, with one non-blocking documentation-structure issue in the sandbox remediation workflow.

The documented API requests and status values align with repository contracts, while the newly added four-stage procedure should be converted from numbered Bash comments into Mintlify Steps components.

Files Needing Attention: mintlify/snippets/sandbox-verification.mdx

Important Files Changed

Filename Overview
mintlify/snippets/kyc/kyc-unregulated.mdx Updates hosted and API-driven onboarding guidance with corrected lifecycle, name, document, and error-response requirements; no actionable defect identified.
mintlify/snippets/sandbox-verification.mdx Corrects sandbox KYC/KYB suffix behavior and examples, but formats the new sequential remediation procedure contrary to the repository’s Steps-component requirement.
Prompt To Fix All With AI
### Issue 1
mintlify/snippets/sandbox-verification.mdx:38-40
**Sequential workflow lacks Steps structure**

The new four-stage fix-and-resubmit procedure uses numbered comments inside one Bash block instead of the required `<Steps>` and `<Step>` components, reducing the workflow's scannability and preventing each request from presenting its expected outcome separately.

---

For each issue above, determine whether it is valid and should be fixed. If so, fix it directly.

Reviews (1): Last reviewed commit: "docs(kyc): align sandbox verification an..." | Re-trigger Greptile

Comment thread mintlify/snippets/sandbox-verification.mdx Outdated
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@akanter
akanter merged commit 62bf9dc into main Aug 11, 2026
9 checks passed
@akanter
akanter deleted the 08-11-docs_kyc_align_sandbox_verification_and_onboarding_docs_with_implemented_behavior branch August 11, 2026 14:56
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants