pitch.accruals.finance
Accruals, posted as typed calls.
The recurring accrual designed as a typed call: proposed with its method recorded, posted only through a recorded posting authorization from a named party at the entity, reversed on the schedule the record itself carries. The write grain of the close suite. Nothing here is live yet, and this deck says so plainly.
↓ scroll · arrow keys
The flagship's own problem slide names it as the second mask of the Ritual: one recurring accrual is computed correctly every month by exactly one person, from a method that was never written down. This door exists for that sentence.
You already know your accruals. The bonus plan, the commission estimate,
the rebate reserve, the legal accrual. Each one is an estimate, which
means each one has a method: a basis, a source, a computation. And in most
closes the method is not a record. It is a person. The basis is in their
head, the source is in their downloads folder, the computation is in a
spreadsheet tab named FINAL v3, and the number is right, monthly,
because the same person computes it the same way. When they leave, the
accrual becomes archaeology.
The reversal is the quieter failure. An accrual is a claim about the period boundary, and it is only honest if it unwinds on schedule. An entry whose reversal is a next-month task in someone's memory becomes a stale balance, and a stale balance left long enough hardens into a plug that nobody owns and everybody works around.
Nothing here is forbidden. Proposing an entry, posting it under the entity's authorization, reversing it on schedule: none of that is a reserved act anywhere. The work is fully permitted, almost entirely undocumented, and it fails anyway, every month, in the same places. The villain is a practice, and the product is the practice replaced by a record.
One worker, one cycle, three acts, named the way the family's catalog of record names them: propose, post, reverse. One designed shape:
// the contract as designed. nothing at this domain is callable today
POST /v1/workers/accruals // requiresAccess: ledger-connection
{
"entity": "opco-us",
"period": "2026-06",
"accrual": "bonus-plan",
"basis": { "source": "payroll register, dated", "computation": "recorded" }
}
// designed response: a proposal, never a posting
{
"entry": {
"state": "proposed", // proposed | authorized | posted | reversed
"method": { "basis": "named", "source": "dated", "computation": "on the entry" },
"posting": "only on a recorded posting authorization from a named party at the entity",
"reversal": { "scheduled": "2026-07-01", "carried": "on the same record" }
}
}
The rules are the close suite's, applied at the write grain. An entry proposed without its method is not a proposal: the basis, the source, and the computation travel on the entry as part of its record. The posting is never the worker's act: an agent prepares an entry, and it posts only through a recorded posting authorization from a named party at the entity, carried on the entry itself. The reversal is part of the entry, scheduled in the same act, owned by deterministic code rather than by next month's memory. And a proposal that is never authorized posts nothing and meters nothing.
Everything on this slide is design intent. In the family's catalog of record the row this door answers for, accrual-agent, is stamped ROADMAP: no call is servable, and the register at the apex says "Nothing at this domain is live." The contract ships as a servable surface only behind the family's publish gates, with its price posted on the family card in the same commit.
Two boundaries hold this door up, and they are different objects.
The posting boundary is the product's own law, and it is why the write grain can be automated at all: an agent prepares an entry; it posts one only through a recorded posting authorization from a named party at the entity, carried on the entry as part of its record. A worker that posts on its own authority is not a faster close. It is an unattributed number, at machine speed. The entity closes its own books, always; this platform prepares, records, schedules, and routes.
The reserved edge is the statute book's law, and the family states it the same way on every door: the close is not reserved, the opinion is. Expressing assurance on financial statements belongs to a licensed firm under the state accountancy acts, signing a tax return to a credentialed preparer, representation before a taxing authority to a Circular 230 practitioner, investment advice to the advisers regime. A call that reaches any of the four is designed to return a typed BLOCKED with a cure that names the act, the reason, the party who may lawfully perform it, and the route. The platform performs none of the four, and neither does any pool.
And one posture, inherited from the family: this record states what is mechanically true, that the method, the authorization, and the reversal are carried on the entry's own record, and it claims nothing about what a third party will conclude from that record. What your auditor makes of a well-kept entry is your auditor's conclusion to draw.
gigs.accountants serves its RESERVED register leaf (curl-verified 2026-07-30): "Reserved for the accounting supply face of the gigs estate." The credentialed route this deck names is typed and refused today, not staffed.
| instrument | returns | meter | price |
|---|---|---|---|
| Recurring accrual (accrual-agent) | entry proposed with method recorded; posted under a recorded authorization; reversal scheduled on the record | no record, no charge | Price posts with the SKU |
This door answers for exactly one row, and says so. The family map rules that the close-suite work-product names never carry a catalog of their own, and this record honors the ruling instead of inflating past it: one worker, priced flat, fixed at post, posted on the family's one rate card, released on the record produced. A proposal that is never authorized meters nothing. No fee varies with the day-count achieved, for the same reason no fee in this family varies with the direction of a Decision: a fee that rewards closing fast is a machine for closing wrong. No seats, no minimums, no percentage of anything. Until a SKU posts, the one price cell above reads exactly what the vertical's publish gates require it to read.
The fourth ProofPredicate was written for data products. Whether a close work product, here the posted and reversing entry, is a served record is an open owner question in the vertical's canon. Until it is ruled, the meter promise here is design intent, and no SKU ships against it.
substrate — apis.finance
the controller who owns the close
the whole close, calendar grain
the agent running a close, read side
tie-outs as typed calls; nothing posts
the controller automating the entry cycle
accruals posted as typed calls
the builder embedding the family
one key, posted prices, the money kernel
A brand here is one ICP and one motion, chosen explicitly, and the grain boundaries are rules rather than vibes. The flagship addresses the human who owns the calendar. The read-grain sibling addresses the agent-run close on the evidence side, where nothing ever posts. This door is the write grain: the one work-product door whose deliverable crosses the posting boundary into the ledger, which is exactly why its motion keeps a named human in the loop by construction. And the filing is worn openly rather than smoothed over: the vertical's owner ruling files this name among the work-product aliases that 301 into the flagship once the flagship ships. The flagship has not shipped, the apex already posts a door-grain identity ("Reserved for accruals, posted as typed calls"), and this record proposes the write-grain door as a graduation, on the estate's own precedent, filed the same day the read-grain sibling filed its own. Ratify or reverse; the register stays honest either way.
monthend.finance, the flagship, serves its RESERVED register leaf (curl-verified 2026-07-30): "Reserved for the close, as a product." The ruling that would 301 this name into the flagship has not triggered.
apis.finance serves today: "Agents can't lend. They can call it.", the family hub with the key funnel, llms.txt, and the rate-card frame the accrual row would post on. One key is designed to open every live door in the family.
The apex serves the family register's own leaf (curl-verified 2026-07-30), titled "accruals.finance · RESERVED · apis.finance family register": "Reserved for accruals, posted as typed calls. Accrual proposal, posting, and reversal as part of the month-end close suite. Nothing at this domain is live." The identity this deck argues is already posted at the apex, in the estate's one honest word.
The machine leaf serves the same register: /llms.txt posts the RESERVED status, the holding class, the role sentence, and the family's live doors, so an agent reading this domain cold learns exactly what a human does.
Until the close-suite ruling lands, no close-suite copy may claim a capability, and this deck claims none: every capability slide above is design intent, and the suite's domains remain holding leaves.
The graduation this record proposes, a work-product door at the write grain rather than a 301 alias, is a filing decision the owner has not made. It is recorded in this file's frontmatter reconciliation note and queued; the deck's green Claims stay curl-true under either outcome.
The register at accruals.finance already says what this door is reserved for, and keys@apis.finance, the register's own door line, is where you hear when it opens.
If this was forwarded to you: accruals.finance is the reserved write-grain door of an accounting close suite, the recurring accrual designed as a typed call that arrives with its method recorded, posts only through a recorded posting authorization from a named party at the entity, and carries its own reversal, or posts nothing and charges nothing. Nothing at the domain is live; the deck above states every capability as design intent and carries the evidence for every liveness fact it posts. The live front door of the family is apis.finance. To hear when this one opens, write to keys@apis.finance.