Originator/beneficiary field completeness on hashed/synthetic transfer batches incl. unhosted-wallet branch (ART-104) -> Merkle integrity (cry-04). Reuses the shipped synthetic-batch screening pattern; no real PII.
validate_tfr_travel_rule_batch{
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"name": "validate_tfr_travel_rule_batch",
"arguments": {}
},
"id": 1
}
verify_merkle_batch{
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"name": "verify_merkle_batch",
"arguments": {}
},
"id": 1
}
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: This batch of transfers is ready to relay. Which records would the TFR validator flag before we send it?
Run the AINumbers MCP tool `run_chain` with {"chain":"mica-travel-rule"} and read `art-104-tfr-travel-rule-batch-validator.batch_conformance_pct`.
Re-run with `inputs` for `art-104-tfr-travel-rule-batch-validator`, reusing the values that result echoed, with `inputs` changed so one transfer omits the originator name. Compare the same field.
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/mica-travel-rule.html