Alpha Covenant Holdings · AP contract ap-view/1 · 2026-10-25

The receipt, shaped for the moment before a payment goes out

Your AP or ERP system asks one question before release: is there a dated read of the exclusion files under this vendor's exact name and key? This contract answers it with the read itself — per source, answered with n rows or did not answer — and a hash you can replay. It does not answer "should we pay": that rule is yours, and the receipt is what your rule reads.

1. One call

POST https://alphacovenantholdings.com/api/ap/check   X-Api-Key: acv_…
{"name":"Example Vendor LLC","uei":"ABC123DEF456","partner_reference":"PO-44812"}

Same read as the free receipt and the batch; the view is stored under your key at GET /api/ap/view/{receipt_id}. For volume, POST the CSV to /api/batch with a webhook_url and call /view per receipt id.

2. What comes back

{
 "contract": "ap-view/1",
 "receipt_id": "r_\u2026",
 "read_at": "2026-10-11T00:00:00+00:00",
 "name_as_submitted": "Example Vendor LLC",
 "keys": {
  "uei": "ABC123DEF456"
 },
 "sources": [
  {
   "source": "sam",
   "state": "answered",
   "exact_rows": 0,
   "similar_shown": 2,
   "similar_names": [
    "EXAMPLE VENDORS INC",
    "EXAMPLE VENDOR GROUP"
   ],
   "official_url": "https://sam.gov/search/?index=ex"
  },
  {
   "source": "leie",
   "state": "did_not_answer",
   "exact_rows": null,
   "similar_shown": 0
  }
 ],
 "decision": null,
 "decision_belongs_to": "payer",
 "sha256": "\u2026"
}

3. Write your rule against it (examples — yours to decide)

• pay only if a receipt dated this month shows sam.state == 'answered' and sam.exact_rows == 0 and leie.state == 'answered' and leie.exact_rows == 0 — decided by the payer
• release automatically only when all_list_sources_answered == true and exact_rows_total == 0; anything else routes to a person. The two fields are facts about the read, not a clearance — decided by the payer
• if any list source state == 'did_not_answer' → route to a person; do not treat as zero — decided by the payer
• if similar_shown > 0 → a person opens the official_url rows before release; the receipt records that they were shown — decided by the payer

4. Replay the hash

POST https://alphacovenantholdings.com/api/ap/verify   {"view": …, "sha256": "…"}

SHA-256 of canonical JSON (keys sorted, non-JSON values via str(), UTF-8) of the view without its sha256 field. The underlying receipt has its own sha256 under the same rule and an Ed25519 certification at /api/receipts/{id}/certification/html.

5. What this contract will never contain

• No score or match confidence: a similar printed name is shown, never counted or weighed.
• No APPROVED / HOLD / CLEAR field: the payer's AP rule decides; this record is what the rule reads.
• No 'no exclusions found' sentence: each source prints answered (n rows under this exact name/key) or did_not_answer — a silent source is never a zero.
• No identity claim: rows under the exact printed name or supplied key are rows under that name or key, nothing more.
• No payment, bank or filing record: this is a read receipt, not a payment receipt.

6. HTTP behaviour, measured

• 201 — view returned; one receipt registered
• 401 — missing or inactive X-Api-Key
• 429 + Retry-After — either the key's monthly row limit, or 'at capacity' — 40 receipts are built at once and none finished within 10 s; retry after the header, the receipt is never thinned to make room
• did_not_answer — a source that rate-limited or timed out prints did_not_answer with exact_rows null — never 'no record'; for pre-payment runs over ~40 names use POST /api/batch, which paces reads and retries unanswered rows the next day
• measured_2026-10-11 — 100 simultaneous checks: 60 served (p50 28 s, p95 35 s), 40 answered 429 at capacity, 0 degraded views; a 100-row batch had every row built, every source answered, in 9 min

Partner spec: https://alphacovenantholdings.com/api/batch/spec · JSON: https://alphacovenantholdings.com/api/ap/contract · Public-record evidence, not legal advice or a compliance determination.