Step 1
Before any wallet move, account link, subscription, or order suggestion, TRADING4AI checks whether the action should be allowed, reviewed, or blocked.
What it returns
Decision: allow / review / block
Risk flags tied to the input text and payment rails
Required checks and a safe next step
Source refs, timestamp, and limitations
Four named public sample cases for high-risk action checks
Delivery contract
A static/client-side pre-action check that classifies a proposed financial-agent action as allow, review, or block.
Boundary semantics
Intended users
Artifact provenance
Inputs: Financial action draft
Outputs: Bounded preflight verdict
Suitable for
Not suitable for
Source / limitation policy
Crawler and agent guidance
How to use this page
Read the HTML page first to understand scope, limitations, and non-goals. Open the linked scenario pack only when the task is already concrete. Download the JSON only after the boundary is clear, and escalate to human review before irreversible action or clearance-like claims.
Start here
Open the linked pack when
Start here first: Counterparty screening before payment
Start here first: Crypto signal subscription before payment
Start here next: Wallet transfer to unverified counterparty
Start here next: Payment instruction change before settlement
Fallback catalog: Public Materials
Download the JSON when
JSON artifact: /reliability/action-preflight-sample.json
Escalate to human review when
This page does not do
Related public material packs
The service page explains the general contract. These linked packs are the next step when the user, crawler, or agent already knows the real-world review scenario it needs to inspect.
Start here first
A financial agent is about to prepare a cross-border vendor payment or wallet transfer to a new counterparty with incomplete verification.
Why it matters: This is a real high-risk pre-action scenario where static risk review material is more useful than generic trading copy.
Why start here: Start here first when an agent is close to moving money, accepting new payment instructions, or acting on weak counterparty evidence.
Start here first
A financial agent is about to pay for a crypto signal group or invite-only trading club that promises guaranteed returns and asks for brokerage or custody access.
Why it matters: This is one of the clearest high-risk financial-agent actions in the current public scope: money movement, unsafe claim language, and account-access pressure all appear before trust is earned.
Why start here: Start here first when an agent is asked to pay in crypto, trust guaranteed-return language, or connect a brokerage account for auto-trading access.
Start here next
A financial agent is asked to send a crypto wallet transfer to a new counterparty in a private group, but the wallet address, ownership claims, and counterparty identity are not independently verified.
Why it matters: Irreversible wallet transfer plus opaque counterparty evidence is one of the clearest high-risk action-preflight scenarios in the current public scope.
Why start here: Start here next when a high-risk crypto wallet transfer points to a new counterparty and the destination remains irreversible, weakly verified, or private-group only.
Start here next
A financial agent is asked to settle an invoice using new bank or wallet instructions that arrived shortly before cut-off through a channel that was not previously verified.
Why it matters: Changed payment instructions are a classic irreversible-action risk: the money can move before identity, beneficiary ownership, and instruction legitimacy are verified.
Why start here: Start here first when a beneficiary, bank account, or wallet destination changes shortly before payment and the instruction arrives through a weak or unverified channel.
Fallback
Use the Public Materials index when the task is still broad, or when the service is right but the scenario pack is not obvious yet.
Index page: /agent-verification/materials
JSON artifact: /reliability/public-materials-sample.json
Result
Decision meaning
This output is a stop signal for the current action step, not a legal ruling or compliance clearance.
reviewMode: human_review_required
citationPolicy: do_not_upgrade_to_clearance
Keep human review in the loop before any action.
Do not present the result as legal, compliance, or suitability clearance.
Decision semantics
These are the stable meanings published in the static artifact and should stay unchanged across summaries.
This output supports evidence-gathering only; it is not action approval or a guarantee of safety.
Use when: Use allow as a bounded signal to continue evidence-gathering or low-risk research work.Do not upgrade to: Do not upgrade allow into approval, safety clearance, profitability, or a guarantee that the action should proceed.reviewMode: reference_only / citationPolicy: source_bound_summary_onlyThis output requires human review and remains a reference decision, not final authorization.
Use when: Use review when the action still needs counterparty checks, evidence collection, or qualified human sign-off.Do not upgrade to: Do not upgrade review into soft approval, partial compliance clearance, or permission to move money while gaps remain.reviewMode: human_review_required / citationPolicy: do_not_upgrade_to_clearanceThis output is a stop signal for the current action step, not a legal ruling or compliance clearance.
Use when: Use block as a stop signal for the current step when marketing claims, payment pressure, or instruction changes make execution unsafe.Do not upgrade to: Do not upgrade block into a legal ruling, final enforcement conclusion, or permanent verdict on every related action.reviewMode: human_review_required / citationPolicy: do_not_upgrade_to_clearanceSample inventory
Pick the scenario that matches the risk review task. Why it matters is part of the public contract.
A user is asked to pay in crypto and connect a brokerage account after seeing guaranteed-return marketing.
Why it matters: Shows why financial agents must stop before irreversible payment and reject guaranteed-return plus auto-trading claims.An agent wants to prepare a supplier payment to a newly introduced overseas company with incomplete identity verification.
Why it matters: Shows how pre-action review should pause cross-border money movement when the counterparty record is incomplete.A wallet transfer is requested to a new private group with opaque claims and no independent verification.
Why it matters: Shows the high-risk overlap between irreversible wallet transfers and weak counterparty verification.A supplier asks to switch bank or wallet details through an unverified side channel shortly before settlement.
Why it matters: Shows why financial agents should stop changed payment instructions until beneficiary, channel, and urgency claims are verified.Public sample cases
A user is asked to pay in crypto and connect a brokerage account after seeing guaranteed-return marketing.
An agent wants to prepare a supplier payment to a newly introduced overseas company with incomplete identity verification.
A wallet transfer is requested to a new private group with opaque claims and no independent verification.
A supplier asks to switch beneficiary details through an unverified side channel shortly before settlement.
Risk flags
Required checks
Source refs
Machine JSON
{
"decision": "block",
"decisionMeaning": "This output is a stop signal for the current action step, not a legal ruling or compliance clearance.",
"riskFlags": [
"guaranteed_return_claim",
"auto_trading_permission_request",
"crypto_payment_irreversibility",
"brokerage_connection_request"
],
"requiredChecks": [
"verify registration or licensing",
"search official regulator sources",
"do not act on guaranteed-return marketing claims",
"do not share brokerage credentials",
"verify permissions requested by the app",
"require human review before granting trading access",
"treat crypto payment as irreversible",
"verify counterparty identity before sending funds",
"do not pay before independent verification",
"confirm the exact account permissions requested",
"require human review before connection"
],
"safeNextStep": "Stop before execution. Verify the counterparty, claims, permissions, and payment path through official sources before taking action.",
"sourceRefs": [
"/agent-verification",
"https://www.sec.gov/oiea/investor-alerts-and-bulletins",
"https://www.finra.org/investors/learn-to-invest",
"https://consumer.ftc.gov/articles/what-know-about-cryptocurrency-and-scams"
],
"retrievedAt": "2026-05-23T00:00:00.000Z",
"limitations": [
"This is an action preflight, not legal, compliance, tax, or investment advice.",
"A clean result does not prove that an action is safe, suitable, profitable, or compliant.",
"High-risk or ambiguous actions should be reviewed by a qualified human before execution."
],
"reviewMode": "human_review_required",
"citationPolicy": {
"mode": "do_not_upgrade_to_clearance",
"summary": "Use the output only as a pre-action risk reference, not as approval or clearance.",
"guidance": [
"Keep human review in the loop before any action.",
"Do not present the result as legal, compliance, or suitability clearance."
]
}
}Why it exists
Good enough for a first release if the output is bounded, auditable, and human-reviewable.
What it is not
The result is about risk control and evidence, not about promising upside or auto-execution.
Machine path
Use the JSON artifact when another agent or tool needs the sample contract without the UI.