docs: document ownershipType field for external accounts - #801
docs: document ownershipType field for external accounts#801claude[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
Add documentation for the new optional ownershipType field (FIRST_PARTY, THIRD_PARTY) introduced in #784. This field helps platforms distinguish between first-party transfers (to customer's own account) and third-party transfers (to another person's account) for compliance purposes. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub. 2 Skipped Deployments
|
|
Preview deployment for your docs. Learn more about Mintlify Previews.
|
Greptile SummaryThe PR documents the optional external-account
Confidence Score: 4/5The documentation should be corrected before merging so the new USD example includes the beneficiary address required by the same page. The ownershipType values and placement match the API schema, but developers copying the new third-party USD example would omit fields that the documentation identifies as required for US beneficiaries. Files Needing Attention: mintlify/snippets/external-accounts.mdx
|
| Filename | Overview |
|---|---|
| mintlify/snippets/external-accounts.mdx | Adds ownership-type guidance, but the new USD example conflicts with the page's documented minimum beneficiary requirements. |
Prompt To Fix All With AI
### Issue 1
mintlify/snippets/external-accounts.mdx:1914-1917
**USD beneficiary address omitted**
When a developer copies this `THIRD_PARTY` USD example, the request omits the beneficiary address that the same page identifies as required for US individual beneficiaries, causing the request to be under-specified for the documented compliance requirements.
```suggestion
"beneficiary": {
"beneficiaryType": "INDIVIDUAL",
"fullName": "Jane Smith",
"address": {
"line1": "123 Main Street",
"city": "San Francisco",
"postalCode": "94105",
"country": "US"
}
}
```
---
For each issue above, determine whether it is valid and should be fixed. If so, fix it directly.Reviews (1): Last reviewed commit: "docs: document ownershipType field for e..." | Re-trigger Greptile
| "beneficiary": { | ||
| "beneficiaryType": "INDIVIDUAL", | ||
| "fullName": "Jane Smith" | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
USD beneficiary address omitted
When a developer copies this THIRD_PARTY USD example, the request omits the beneficiary address that the same page identifies as required for US individual beneficiaries, causing the request to be under-specified for the documented compliance requirements.
| "beneficiary": { | |
| "beneficiaryType": "INDIVIDUAL", | |
| "fullName": "Jane Smith" | |
| } | |
| "beneficiary": { | |
| "beneficiaryType": "INDIVIDUAL", | |
| "fullName": "Jane Smith", | |
| "address": { | |
| "line1": "123 Main Street", | |
| "city": "San Francisco", | |
| "postalCode": "94105", | |
| "country": "US" | |
| } | |
| } |
Context Used: mintlify/AGENTS.md (source)
Knowledge Base Used: Mintlify Documentation Site
Prompt To Fix With AI
This is a comment left during a code review.
Path: mintlify/snippets/external-accounts.mdx
Line: 1914-1917
Comment:
**USD beneficiary address omitted**
When a developer copies this `THIRD_PARTY` USD example, the request omits the beneficiary address that the same page identifies as required for US individual beneficiaries, causing the request to be under-specified for the documented compliance requirements.
```suggestion
"beneficiary": {
"beneficiaryType": "INDIVIDUAL",
"fullName": "Jane Smith",
"address": {
"line1": "123 Main Street",
"city": "San Francisco",
"postalCode": "94105",
"country": "US"
}
}
```
**Context Used:** mintlify/AGENTS.md ([source](https://github.com/lightsparkdev/grid-api/blob/main/mintlify/AGENTS.md))
**Knowledge Base Used:** [Mintlify Documentation Site](https://app.greptile.com/lightspark/-/custom-context/knowledge-base/lightsparkdev/grid-api/-/docs/mintlify-docs-site.md)
---
For each issue above, determine whether it is valid and should be fixed. If so, fix it directly.Note: If this suggestion doesn't match your team's coding style, reply to this and let me know. I'll remember it for next time!
Summary
ownershipTypefield on external accountsFIRST_PARTY(customer's own account) andTHIRD_PARTY(another person's account)Test plan
make lint- passes with 0 errors🤖 Generated with Claude Code