W-A. Cross-network atomicity + finality-compatibility + settlement-risk window (ART-58) -> asset-leg DvP atomicity (507) -> FX-leg PvP (511). The flagship Wave-13 decision chain: is this tokenized settlement all-or-nothing across the cash network and the asset network?
validate_cross_network_settlement{
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"name": "validate_cross_network_settlement",
"arguments": {}
},
"id": 1
}
validate_canton_dvp_atomicity{
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"name": "validate_canton_dvp_atomicity",
"arguments": {}
},
"id": 1
}
validate_pvp_settlement{
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"name": "validate_pvp_settlement",
"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: Our trade settles across two networks that do not talk to each other. Does either side still face settlement risk?
Run the AINumbers MCP tool `run_chain` with {"chain":"wholesale-settlement-cross-network-dvp"} and read `511-multi-currency-pvp-validator.verdict`.
Re-run with `inputs` for `511-multi-currency-pvp-validator`, reusing the values that result echoed, with `has_unwind_procedure` set to false. 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/wholesale-settlement-cross-network-dvp.html