OpenChainGraph Suite · wave 28 · compliance_mandate

EMIR Trade Report Validation

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.

Validate the required-field subset of an ISO 20022 auth.030 derivative trade report: action type, counterparty LEIs, UTI, UPI, notional, currency, and asset class (art-153) → validate UTI format (ISO 23897, ≤52 chars) and T+1 10:00 CET sharing timing (art-154) → validate UPI format (ISO 4914, 12-char ANNA DSB) and product classification (art-155). Pre-submission validation catches rejections before reaching the Trade Repository. Zero network, zero PII.

OpenChainGraph · 3 Steps compliance mandate EMIR Refit 2024 ISO 20022 auth.030 W3C VC §13.11 Hash-Anchored §4 chain_depth:3 · Zero PII
Chain Topology — EMIR Trade Report Validation (art-153→154→155)
art-153 Trade Report Field Validator art-154 UTI Completeness Checker art-155 UPI Validator ⊥
§4 Execution Hash · Chain Definition Anchor
execution_hash:computing…
Chain Stages · 3 Steps
1ROOT · D0node
EMIR Trade Report Field Validator art-153
Field validity feeds UTI completeness checker
MCP Call · validate_emir_trade_report
{
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "name": "validate_emir_trade_report",
    "arguments": {
      "report": {
        "action_type": "New",
        "reporting_counterparty_lei": "MAES062Z21O4RZ2U7M96",
        "other_counterparty_lei": "7LTWFZYICNSX8D621K86",
        "uti": "UTI-EXAMPLE-001-20240429",
        "upi": "DJMM0VX7HY4A",
        "notional": 1000000,
        "notional_currency": "EUR",
        "effective_date": "2024-04-29",
        "asset_class": "IR"
      }
    }
  },
  "id": 1
}
https://mcp.ainumbers.co/mcp
↓
2MIDDLE · D1node
EMIR UTI Completeness Checker art-154
UTI completeness feeds UPI validator
MCP Call · check_emir_uti_completeness
{
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "name": "check_emir_uti_completeness",
    "arguments": {
      "uti": "UTI-EXAMPLE-001-20240429",
      "generating_party": "MAES062Z21O4RZ2U7M96",
      "trade_unix": 1714348800,
      "uti_shared_unix": 1714406400
    }
  },
  "id": 2
}
https://mcp.ainumbers.co/mcp
↓
3TERMINAL · D2node
EMIR UPI Validator art-155
Exports UPI validity verdict with execution_hash — final stage
MCP Call · validate_emir_upi
{
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "name": "validate_emir_upi",
    "arguments": {
      "upi": "DJMM0VX7HY4A",
      "asset_class": "IR",
      "instrument_type": "IRS"
    }
  },
  "id": 3
}
https://mcp.ainumbers.co/mcp
Export Artifacts
Download the §4 chain definition artifact or the §13.11 W3C VC view. Each of art-153, art-154, and art-155 individually support Policy Mandate JSON and W3C VC export.

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: Our EMIR report keeps bouncing at the trade repository. Does the UPI itself clear ISO 4914 format rules before we escalate to the counterparty?
Run the AINumbers MCP tool `run_chain` with {"chain":"emir-trade-report-validation"} and read `art-155-emir-upi-validator.upi_valid`.
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/emir-trade-report-validation.html