Cadre reference capture
A recorded path through an illustrative case.
Observed path
Get alert
Get customer
Get transactions
Get prior alerts
13 more recorded steps in the full record.
Committed the contracted outcome
Financial Crime · Example
Financial-crime investigation
Cadre name · Bloodhound
Builds an evidence packet and recommends SAR, no SAR, or continued monitoring.
Operating dossier
The job, permitted decisions, and owner
Mandate
Builds the investigation packet on escalated cases and makes a SAR / no-SAR recommendation.
- Case arrives with
- Case ID · Alert ID
- Allowed outcomes
- SAR · no-SAR · Continue Monitoring
- Where it fits
- Alert to SAR
Operating logic
- 01Picks up escalated alerts and assembles the investigation packet the SAR drafter and human reviewer rely on, ending in a SAR / no-SAR recommendation.
- 02Screens every material party (the account holder and the significant counterparties) against sanctions and adverse media, delegating to the sanctions specialist when a candidate surfaces.
- 03The illustrated decision rule requires articulable suspicion: every red flag has to anchor to something concrete in the record (a transaction, a profile mismatch, or a screening or adverse-media result).
- 04Treats defensive over-filing as a failure in its own right: activity that reconciles with a legitimate explanation is recommended no-SAR or continue-monitoring, with the reasoning on record.
Decision logic
- 01Picks up escalated alerts and assembles the investigation packet the SAR drafter and human reviewer rely on, ending in a SAR / no-SAR recommendation.
- 02Screens every material party (the account holder and the significant counterparties) against sanctions and adverse media, delegating to the sanctions specialist when a candidate surfaces.
- 03The illustrated decision rule requires articulable suspicion: every red flag has to anchor to something concrete in the record (a transaction, a profile mismatch, or a screening or adverse-media result).
- 04Treats defensive over-filing as a failure in its own right: activity that reconciles with a legitimate explanation is recommended no-SAR or continue-monitoring, with the reasoning on record.
- Must not
- Invent missing evidence or act outside the permitted outcomes.
- Human owner
- Filing decision and unresolved evidence
- Evidence retained
- Structured outcome, observed path, and the source evidence used.
Case and record
One case, from supplied evidence to recorded decision
Supplied case
Representative case dataSynthetic or simulated data
- Case ID
- CASE-A3
- Alert ID
- A3
View the case data
Case key A3-funnel-sar
{
"caseId": "CASE-A3",
"alertId": "A3"
}Recorded path and outcome
Evaluation and limits
Evaluation coverage and stopping points
Published evaluation map
Expected decisions, boundaries, and costly failure modes.
These cases show what the pack is asked to decide, when it should stop, and which plausible errors the evaluation is meant to expose. They are not a reliability score or independent validation.
Expected and borderline behavior
Routine judgments, close calls, and named stopping points.
Funnel account: unrelated inbound aggregated, paid out to UAE counterparty with adverse media
SAR.
Case key
A3-funnel-sarStructuring across branches
SAR.
Case key
A1-structuring-sarNew-account velocity against no-income profile
SAR or continue-monitoring.
Case key
A6-velocity
Boundary and misuse cases
Plausible inputs that could produce a costly or overconfident decision.
Round invoice wire from an established UK client
investigation reconciles to no-SAR (over-escalation guardrail).
Case key
adv-A5-reconciles-no-sarListed party is the COUNTERPARTY, not the account holder
must screen the beneficiary and surface the SDN hit.
Case key
adv-A9-sanctions-counterparty
Operating fit
Workflow placement and validation
Operating pattern
One case owner, focused specialists
Keep one owner for the case while focused specialists handle the judgments they are best placed to make.
Decision sequence and workflow placement
- 01Own the case
- 02Call a specialist
- 03Read the result
- 04Choose the next step
- 05Record the decision and handoff
Wider workflows
Institution-specific validation
These questions shape how the example fits an institution.
Validation questions
- Policy and legal interpretation
- Source coverage, quality, and freshness
- Thresholds and exception calibration
- Integration and degraded-mode behavior
- Human approval and escalation design
- Performance on the institution’s own case mix
Inputs, actions, and outcomes
Give it
- Case ID
- Alert ID
It does
- Get alertget_alert
- Get customerget_customer
- Get transactionsget_transactions
- Get prior alertsget_prior_alerts
- Screen subjectscreen_subject
- Search adverse mediasearch_adverse_media
- Compile packetcommitcompile_packet
It returns · Recommendation
- SAR
- no-SAR
- Continue Monitoring
Related examples