OpenChainGraph Suite · Financial Crime & KYC

Responsible-Officer Certification Cycle (FATCA / CRS)

Note (dated 2026-08-04): a chain composes independent computations performed in an analytical order. No step's output is carried into the next step by the execution model; each step computes from its own declared inputs. This is true of every chain on this site, including chains whose per-step copy below reads as a data handoff.
Reading mode (READINESS-BUILD): These checks can be gathered in any order; the sequence below is for convenience. The submission-quality check and the notification/remediation triage each evaluate an already-existing record set and are combined into one certification evidence chain; the chain does not execute the underlying filing.

Two-step certification-period cycle over the institution's own submission file, the notifications returned against it, and its remediation records. Step 1 evaluates the submission against a policy-supplied schema and business-rule set: element sequencing and cardinality, mandatory identifiers, and message and document reference uniqueness across corrected and voided records, keyed by the published error code and element path, with a suppression list so stood-down rules cannot produce false findings. Step 2 triages the returned notification set against the firm's remediation records: open, closed or overdue per notification, which corrected message closes which error, closure coverage, and a readiness verdict against the declared cut-off. Step 1 is gated review_required once findings exist, with the compliance officer as reviewer, because a disclosed-and-corrected failure is a reviewed act rather than an automatic one. Step 2 is gated hold while any error remains unremediated past its policy cut-off. The certification itself carries an approval record bound to the Responsible Officer identity, which is the approver role named exactly as the regulation names it. Free validators already check these files; what this cycle adds is a sealed, offline-verifiable chain from submission errors through remediation to that named signature. The bundle is the institution's own evidence and does not satisfy an IRS or competent-authority requirement.

OpenChainGraph · 2 Steps compliance mandate Hash-Anchored §4 chain_depth:2 Client-Side · Zero PII
Chain Topology: Submission Conformance Check → RO Remediation Closure
§4 Execution Hash · Chain Definition Anchor
execution_hash:computing…
Chain Stages · 2 Steps
1 ROOT node review_required
Submission Conformance Check art-490-fatca-crs-submission-check
Per-finding pass/fail keyed by published error code and element path, with the applied suppressions recorded, feeds the remediation-closure stage
§27 Human Accountability gate: findings against the submission route to review_required with the compliance officer as reviewer, because a disclosed-and-corrected failure is a reviewed act rather than an automatic one.
MCP Call · check_fatca_crs_submission_conformance
{
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "name": "check_fatca_crs_submission_conformance",
    "arguments": {}
  },
  "id": 1
}
https://mcp.ainumbers.co/mcp
↓
2 TERMINAL node hold
RO Remediation Closure art-491-ro-remediation-closure
Open, closed and overdue determinations per notification, resubmission linkage, closure coverage and the certification-period readiness verdict close the certification evidence bundle. Final stage.
§27 Human Accountability gate: an error still unremediated past its policy cut-off puts the period on hold. The certification itself carries an approval record bound to the Responsible Officer identity, which is the approver role named exactly as the regulation names it.
MCP Call · track_fatca_crs_ro_remediation_closure
{
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "name": "track_fatca_crs_ro_remediation_closure",
    "arguments": {}
  },
  "id": 1
}
https://mcp.ainumbers.co/mcp
Export Artifacts
Download the §4 chain definition artifact (hash-anchored composite JSON) or the §13.11 W3C Verifiable Credentials view. Both derive from the chain definition; no new hash is minted. Available after hash computation.

Ask your agent

Copy this paragraph into Claude, OpenClaw, or any MCP-aware agent to run this whole workflow on the server and check one field that answers a real question.

Question: Board sign-off on the responsible-officer certificate is next week. How many notification remediations from this period remain open?
Run the AINumbers MCP tool `run_chain` with {"chain":"fatca-ro-certification-cycle"} and read `art-491-ro-remediation-closure.open_count`.
Verify: call `verify_execution_hash` (https://mcp.ainumbers.co/mcp) with `claimed_hash` set to `composite_execution_hash` and the full `composite_artifact`.
Ledger, for a human re-check: https://ledger.ainumbers.co/
PII rule: send synthetic or anonymised inputs only. The MCP server runs these kernels and logs no payloads.
Chain page: https://ainumbers.co/chaingraph/chains/fatca-ro-certification-cycle.html