docs(withdrawal): clarify beneficiary vs payment-instruction lifecycle#23
Open
diegopereira90 wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
Open
docs(withdrawal): clarify beneficiary vs payment-instruction lifecycle#23diegopereira90 wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
diegopereira90 wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
Conversation
Two corrections to the "Register a beneficiary" step in the withdrawal journey, addressing the open item from Leone's docs review: 1. The beneficiary record itself has no status. Status, review, and webhook events are tracked at the payment-instruction level. Re-word to make that explicit and to frame the beneficiary as a reusable record across destinations — the first instruction on a new beneficiary triggers the full compliance review, subsequent instructions on the same beneficiary go through a reduced check (without exposing the internal rules in detail). 2. List the webhook events emitted at this step: BENEFICIARY_PAYMENT_INSTRUCTION_CREATED, _APPROVED, _REJECTED — so integrators know what to subscribe to for the review outcome. Mirrors what the "Submit the operation" step already does for OPERATION_REQUESTED / _COMPLETED / _FAILED. Step title also adjusted from "Register a beneficiary (one time per destination)" — that subtitle was misleading since one beneficiary can carry multiple payment instructions over time. New title: "Register a beneficiary and add a payment instruction". Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
Preview deployment for your docs. Learn more about Mintlify Previews.
💡 Tip: Enable Workflows to automatically generate PRs for you. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
Closes the last open item from Leone's docs review on the beneficiary scope: the withdrawal journey did not list the webhook events emitted while a payment instruction is reviewed, and it described the lifecycle as if it lived on the beneficiary itself.
Two corrections in the "Register a beneficiary" step:
1. Lifecycle correction
Before:
This was misleading. The beneficiary record itself has no status — it is created once and reused across destinations. The lifecycle (PENDING_REVIEW → APPROVED/REJECTED) lives on each payment instruction.
After:
The "reduced check" line communicates the reuse benefit without exposing the internal compliance rules.
2. Webhook events at this step
Mirrors what the "Submit the operation" step already does for
OPERATION_*. Adds an explicit list of the three beneficiary webhook events so integrators know what to subscribe to:BENEFICIARY_PAYMENT_INSTRUCTION_CREATED(fires immediately on creation)BENEFICIARY_PAYMENT_INSTRUCTION_APPROVED/BENEFICIARY_PAYMENT_INSTRUCTION_REJECTED(one of these once review completes)3. Step title
Renamed
"Register a beneficiary (one time per destination)"→"Register a beneficiary and add a payment instruction". The original subtitle was misleading because one beneficiary can carry multiple payment instructions over time.Coverage of Leone's review (beneficiary scope)
events/beneficiary/has the three pages aligned withapis/fx-payment/openapi.yml.guides/kyc-kyb.mdx(#22).BENEFICIARY_PAYMENT_INSTRUCTION_*events.apis/fx-payment/openapi.ymlCreateBeneficiaryRequestmatches fx-payment's current DTO (holder.addressrequired, nonationality, same shape).Type of change
🤖 Generated with Claude Code