Teller vs Yapily

Hosted flows

1. developerLet a user connect their bank with a drop-in hosted flow — create a session server-side, open the widget, and get back a token for the connected account — without building institution UI myself

   weight 3 · round to Yapily
   Teller~partialclaimed6/10

   Teller has a documented Connect widget (React SDK, teller-connect-react) and quickstart flow that lets users link accounts, plus a sandbox environment for testing enrollments and OTP flows, matching the drop-in hosted-flow story. However, evidence lacks explicit detail on server-side session creation and the exact token exchange flow, and no independent hands-on account of the widget UX beyond first-party docs. missing for 10: explicit session-creation API docs, independent/hands-on verification of the widget flow, and detail on token retrieval mechanics.

   • [claimed-docs] “Learn about Teller Connect and how to integrate and customize it for you application.”
   • [claimed-docs] “finish up by linking your first financial accounts to Teller.”
   • [github] “React hook and component for integrating with Teller Connect”
   • [claimed-docs] “`otp` () - Will follow an OTP MFA flow whereby the user will be asked to select a contact to send an OTP code. The correct code is `0000`”
   • [claimed-docs] “The sandbox environment uses simulated data and never connects to real financial institutions.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Connect instantly with more than 7,000 financial institutions and fall back to same-day ACH microdeposit verification for everyone else.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily✓fullclaimed7/10

   Yapily Connect is explicitly documented as a ready-built, white-label hosted UI for AIS/PIS flows with pre-built institution selection and consent screens, no frontend engineering required, automatic SCA/redirect handling, and customizable branding — matching the drop-in widget story closely. Missing for 10: explicit documentation of the server-side 'create session' API call and the exact token/consent-object returned to the backend after widget completion, plus independent/hands-on corroboration beyond vendor docs.

   • [claimed-docs] “Yapily Connect provides a ready-built, white-label open banking UI for AIS and PIS flows. Reduce development effort with pre-built instituti…”
   • [claimed-docs] “No frontend engineering required for consent and authorisation flows”
   • [claimed-docs] “Handles Strong Customer Authentication (SCA) and bank redirects automatically”
   • [claimed-docs] “Customisable branding (logo and colours)”
   • [claimed-docs] “UX design guidelines for Yapily Connect AIS flows. Best practices for institution selection, consent screens, and account selection for data…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Oauth

1. developerConnections to major institutions use bank-hosted OAuth rather than screen-scraped credentials — the platform documents its OAuth coverage and how legacy credential flows are being retired

   weight 2 · round to Yapily
   Teller—none0/10

   Teller's docs describe connecting via 'Verify Account Details via Microdeposit' and general account-linking language, but nowhere document OAuth coverage of major institutions or a retirement plan for legacy credential-based flows. Community evidence actually points the other way — the founder compares Teller's terms to 'incumbent screen-scrapers in the market, e.g. Yodlee and Plaid,' and users note banks disclaim liability 'if you give your online banking credentials to a third party,' indicating credential-based (not bank-hosted OAuth) connections were in use historically.

   • [community] “Founder response: 'FWIW it is not currently possible for users to move money with Teller... Our terms are comparable to the incumbent screen…”
   • [community] “UK banks don't accept any liability if you give your online banking credentials to a third party. If some fraud was to come about as a resul…”
   • [claimed-docs] “To access account details from these institutions, you can implement the 'Verify Account Details via Microdeposit' flow.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Connect instantly with more than 7,000 financial institutions and fall back to same-day ACH microdeposit verification for everyone else.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily~partialclaimed4/10

   Yapily's docs describe bank redirect and SCA-based consent flows (docs-9, docs-10) which imply OAuth-style bank-hosted authentication rather than screen-scraping, but no evidence explicitly uses the term 'OAuth,' documents OAuth coverage across institutions, or discusses retirement of legacy credential-scraping flows. Missing for 10: explicit OAuth terminology/documentation, institution-by-institution OAuth coverage stats, and any statement about phasing out screen-scraped credential flows.

   • [claimed-docs] “No frontend engineering required for consent and authorisation flows”
   • [claimed-docs] “Handles Strong Customer Authentication (SCA) and bank redirects automatically”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Repair

1. ops leadBroken connections are repairable — expired or revoked links surface as documented statuses, and users can re-authenticate in an update flow without starting over

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Teller—none0/10

   The evidence covers enrollment webhooks, MFA/OTP sandbox flows, and microdeposit verification, but nowhere documents a specific 'broken connection' status taxonomy or a re-authentication/update flow for expired or revoked links. Webhook docs mention 'changes in user enrollments' generically but don't detail reconnect/repair UX.

   • [claimed-docs] “To register a new webhook, you need to have a URL in your app that Teller can call. You can configure a new webhook from the Teller Dashboar…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Teller sends webhook events when specific conditions or changes are detected in user enrollments or their financial data.”
   • [claimed-docs] “`otp` () - Will follow an OTP MFA flow whereby the user will be asked to select a contact to send an OTP code. The correct code is `0000`”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily—none0/10

   The evidence pack covers payments, data retrieval, webhooks, and Yapily Connect UI, but nothing documents how expired/revoked consent links surface as statuses or how users re-authenticate via an update flow without restarting the linking process — missing for 10: documented consent-expiry/revocation status codes, and an explicit re-auth/update flow that preserves prior linkage.

   ⚑ flag

Agent access

1. ai-native userPoint an agent at llms.txt or agent-oriented docs

   weight 2 · round to Yapily
   Teller—none0/10

   Probes directly show no llms.txt, no docs.md, and no OpenAPI file at expected locations (all 404), and no evidence of any agent-oriented documentation format elsewhere in the pack.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://teller.io/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://teller.io/docs.md”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://teller.io/openapi.json, https://teller.io/swagger.json, https://teller.io/api/openapi.json, …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily✓fullprobed9/10

   Yapily explicitly documents an llms.txt file (confirmed live via probe returning HTTP 200) and dedicated agent-oriented docs describing how to connect Claude, Cursor, or other AI agents via MCP, llms.txt, or Agent Skills, directly matching the story. Missing for 10: independent third-party confirmation of an agent successfully consuming the docs end-to-end.

   • [claimed-docs] “Connect Claude, Cursor, or another AI coding agent directly to these docs via MCP, llms.txt, or Agent Skills.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Yapily Connect provides a ready-built, white-label open banking UI for AIS and PIS flows. Reduce development effort with pre-built instituti…”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://docs.yapily.com/llms.txt # Yapily API Documentation - [Welcome to Yapily Docs](https://docs.yapily.com/…”
   • [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.yapily.com/resources/ai-agents”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

2. ai-native userRun the product headlessly / in CI for automation

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Teller~partialcommunity5/10

   Teller is an API-first product (mTLS-authenticated REST API with a sandbox environment) that is inherently callable headlessly from scripts, and a community example shows a script consuming the API to export data. However there is no explicit documentation of CI integration, a CLI, or automation-specific guidance/examples for headless pipelines. Missing for 10: explicit CI/CD documentation, CLI or SDK examples for automated pipelines, and any first-party guidance on non-interactive/headless usage patterns.

   • [claimed-docs] “The Teller API uses mTLS to authenticate the API caller. Teller issues client certificates that you use to connect to the Teller API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “The sandbox environment uses simulated data and never connects to real financial institutions.”
   • [claimed-docs] “`otp` () - Will follow an OTP MFA flow whereby the user will be asked to select a contact to send an OTP code. The correct code is `0000`”
   • [community] “I built a little script to export my accounts to CSV/QIF. Super easy to use API! https://github.com/scottrobertson/teller-export”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily~partialclaimed5/10

   Yapily is a REST/API-first platform (payments, data, webhooks) with a sandbox for testing and generated client libraries, implying it can be scripted/automated without a UI, but there is no explicit documentation of running it headlessly in a CI pipeline, no CLI tool, and no automation/testing-pipeline example. missing for 10: explicit CI/CD or headless automation documentation, a CLI or scriptable test harness, evidence of pipeline integration examples.

   • [claimed-docs] “A sandbox is a test environment that allows you to connect your application to a bank and access test accounts to simulate the real Open Ban…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Generate API client libraries for Yapily in your preferred language using the OpenAPI specification. Supports code generation for Java, Pyth…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Webhooks allows you to receive real-time HTTP notifications of changes happening in the Yapily Platform.”
   • [claimed-docs] “No frontend engineering required for consent and authorisation flows”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

3. ai-native userConnect an agent via an official MCP server

   weight 3 · round to Yapily
   Teller—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Yapily~partialprobed6/10

   Yapily documents an official MCP server for connecting AI agents (Claude, Cursor) to its docs, confirmed by both docs and a probe verifying the ai-agents.md resource, so the axis clearly applies and is addressed. However, the evidence only shows MCP access to documentation/context, not to Yapily's actual banking APIs (payments, data, AIS/PIS) as agent-callable tools, and there's no independent or hands-on confirmation of the MCP server's tool set in action. Missing for 10: evidence that the MCP server exposes real API operations (payments, account data) as agent tools, tool/resource list details, and independent corroboration beyond first-party docs.

   • [claimed-docs] “Connect Claude, Cursor, or another AI coding agent directly to these docs via MCP, llms.txt, or Agent Skills.”
   • [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.yapily.com/resources/ai-agents”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

4. ai-native userUse an official CLI

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Teller—none0/10

   No evidence of an official CLI for Teller; only a REST API, SDKs, and a React connect component are documented, and probes for llms.txt/openapi/docs.md all 404. Missing for 10: any mention of a CLI tool, package, or command-line workflow for AI-native/agentic use.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://teller.io/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://teller.io/docs.md”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://teller.io/openapi.json, https://teller.io/swagger.json, https://teller.io/api/openapi.json, …”
   • [github] “React hook and component for integrating with Teller Connect”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily—none0/10

   Yapily provides SDK/client library generation (yapily-docs-8) and AI-agent connectivity via MCP/llms.txt (yapily-docs-6), but there is no evidence of an official CLI tool for interacting with the Yapily platform or APIs.

   ⚑ flag

5. ai-native userDrive the product through a documented public API

   weight 3 · round to Yapily
   Teller~partialprobed6/10

   Teller documents a full REST API (accounts, balances, transactions, identity, payments, webhooks, mTLS auth, pagination, idempotency) that a developer or agent can drive programmatically, and a community member confirms it as an 'easy to use API' for scripting exports. However, probes show no OpenAPI/Swagger spec or llms.txt/docs.md machine-readable format, which limits easy AI-native discovery/automation of the API surface. missing for 10: OpenAPI/Swagger spec, llms.txt or docs.md for agent-friendly discovery, broader independent evidence of agentic/automated API usage beyond one CSV-export script.

   • [claimed-docs] “The account balances API provides your application with live, real-time account balances.”
   • [claimed-docs] “The transactions API exposes the ledger transactions of a financial account.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Identity provides you with all of the accounts the end-user granted your application access authorization along with beneficial owner identi…”
   • [claimed-docs] “The payments resource allows you to send payments to yourself or a 3rd party on behalf of the end-user from their account. Currently the onl…”
   • [claimed-docs] “The Teller API uses mTLS to authenticate the API caller. Teller issues client certificates that you use to connect to the Teller API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “This endpoint supports idempotent requests.”
   • [claimed-docs] “the transactions list endpoint supports pagination controls.”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://teller.io/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://teller.io/docs.md”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://teller.io/openapi.json, https://teller.io/swagger.json, https://teller.io/api/openapi.json, …”
   • [community] “I built a little script to export my accounts to CSV/QIF. Super easy to use API! https://github.com/scottrobertson/teller-export”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily✓fullprobed8/10

   Yapily is API-first: docs describe endpoints for payments, data, webhooks, and confirm OpenAPI-based client library generation, plus explicit AI-agent access via MCP/llms.txt (confirmed live by probe-1 and probe-3), directly matching the 'documented public API for AI-native use' story. Missing for 10: a verifiable OpenAPI spec file (probe-2 found all standard OpenAPI/swagger paths 404) and independent third-party confirmation of API completeness beyond first-party docs.

   • [claimed-docs] “Generate API client libraries for Yapily in your preferred language using the OpenAPI specification. Supports code generation for Java, Pyth…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Connect Claude, Cursor, or another AI coding agent directly to these docs via MCP, llms.txt, or Agent Skills.”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://docs.yapily.com/llms.txt # Yapily API Documentation - [Welcome to Yapily Docs](https://docs.yapily.com/…”
   • [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.yapily.com/resources/ai-agents”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.yapily.com/openapi.json, https://docs.yapily.com/swagger.json, https://docs.yapily.com/…”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can initiate single, scheduled and periodic payments using Yapily's Payments API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Using Yapily's Data API you can access your customers' financial data including account balances, transaction history and account details to…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

6. ai-native userIssue scoped/least-privilege API credentials for an agent

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Teller—none0/10

   Teller's docs describe mTLS client-certificate authentication and per-enrollment user consent, but there is no evidence of any mechanism to mint scoped, least-privilege API credentials specifically for delegating access to an AI agent (e.g., granular permission scopes, agent-specific keys, or revocable sub-credentials). Missing for 10: any documentation of scoped/limited-permission credential issuance, agent-specific key management, or fine-grained access control beyond whole-enrollment consent.

   • [claimed-docs] “The Teller API uses mTLS to authenticate the API caller. Teller issues client certificates that you use to connect to the Teller API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “The Teller API uses mTLS to authenticate the API caller”
   • [claimed-docs] “Identity provides you with all of the accounts the end-user granted your application access authorization along with beneficial owner identi…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Identity provides you with all of the accounts the end-user granted your application access authorization along with beneficial owner identi…”
   • [claimed-docs] “**100 enrollment limit** — An enrollment represents one bank login, which may include multiple accounts”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily—none0/10

   No evidence in the pack describes issuing scoped or least-privilege API credentials/keys for agent use; documentation covers payments, data access, consent flows, and AI-agent documentation connectivity (MCP/llms.txt) but not credential scoping mechanisms.

   ⚑ flag

7. ai-native userBuild against official SDKs

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Teller~partialprobed5/10

   Teller provides an official REST API with documented endpoints and a first-party React SDK (teller-connect-react) for integrating Teller Connect, giving developers something concrete to build against. However, probes show no OpenAPI/swagger spec or llms.txt for machine-readable discovery, and there's no evidence of official SDKs beyond the single React component (e.g., no Python/Node/mobile SDKs), limiting AI-native tooling support. Missing for 10: multi-language official SDKs, machine-readable OpenAPI spec, llms.txt or other AI-agent-friendly documentation.

   • [github] “React hook and component for integrating with Teller Connect”
   • [claimed-docs] “Learn about Teller Connect and how to integrate and customize it for you application.”
   • [claimed-docs] “The Teller API uses mTLS to authenticate the API caller. Teller issues client certificates that you use to connect to the Teller API.”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://teller.io/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://teller.io/docs.md”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://teller.io/openapi.json, https://teller.io/swagger.json, https://teller.io/api/openapi.json, …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily~partialprobed5/10

   Yapily documents generating client libraries from an OpenAPI spec for Java, Python, Node.js, etc., which supports the 'official SDK' story, but this is code generation rather than a maintained, first-party SDK repository, and the probe found no accessible OpenAPI spec file, undermining confidence in this claim. missing for 10: evidence of actual published/maintained SDK repos (GitHub links, versioning, install instructions), independent corroboration, and working OpenAPI spec access.

   • [claimed-docs] “Generate API client libraries for Yapily in your preferred language using the OpenAPI specification. Supports code generation for Java, Pyth…”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.yapily.com/openapi.json, https://docs.yapily.com/swagger.json, https://docs.yapily.com/…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

8. ai-native userSubscribe to events via webhooks

   weight 2 · round to Yapily
   Teller✓fullclaimed7/10

   Teller documents a webhooks API where users register a URL to receive events for enrollment/data changes, configurable via the Dashboard, covering the core subscribe-to-events capability. missing for 10: no documented event type catalog/payload schema, no independent/hands-on confirmation of webhook reliability, and no AI-agent-specific integration pattern beyond generic docs.

   • [claimed-docs] “To register a new webhook, you need to have a URL in your app that Teller can call. You can configure a new webhook from the Teller Dashboar…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Teller sends webhook events when specific conditions or changes are detected in user enrollments or their financial data.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily✓fullclaimed8/10

   Yapily documents a dedicated webhooks system delivering real-time HTTP notifications of platform events (e.g., payment status changes), directly matching the story. Missing for 10: independent/hands-on corroboration of webhook reliability and no detail on subscription filtering/event types.

   • [claimed-docs] “Webhooks allows you to receive real-time HTTP notifications of changes happening in the Yapily Platform.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can track the status of each payment via [Webhooks](/tools-and-services/webhooks/get-started) from the Yapily API for visibility of the …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Agentic features

1. ai-native userGet AI-generated insights and suggestions from my data inside the product

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Teller—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Yapily—none0/10

   Yapily's data API supports transaction categorisation and spending insights (yapily-docs-3), but this is not documented as AI-generated insights or suggestions surfaced within a Yapily product interface; the only AI-related evidence concerns connecting coding agents to its docs via MCP, not AI-driven analysis of user data.

   • [claimed-docs] “Categorise and analyse transaction data with merchant detection and spending insights.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Connect Claude, Cursor, or another AI coding agent directly to these docs via MCP, llms.txt, or Agent Skills.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

2. ai-native userSet up automations that run autonomously in the background

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Teller~partialclaimed4/10

   Teller offers webhooks that fire on enrollment/data changes, enabling event-driven background processing without polling, which is the closest analog to autonomous automation for this financial-data API. However there's no evidence of an AI-agent framework, scheduling/orchestration engine, or any AI-native automation tooling — webhooks are a generic API feature, not an agentic automation capability. Missing for 10: AI agent orchestration support, scheduled/recurring automation tooling, explicit AI-native automation framework or examples.

   • [claimed-docs] “To register a new webhook, you need to have a URL in your app that Teller can call. You can configure a new webhook from the Teller Dashboar…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Teller sends webhook events when specific conditions or changes are detected in user enrollments or their financial data.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily~partialclaimed4/10

   Yapily's Payments API supports scheduled and recurring/variable-recurring payments that execute autonomously without re-authorisation, and webhooks provide background event notifications — both are forms of autonomous background automation. However, there's no evidence of an AI-agent-specific automation-setup flow (e.g., an agent configuring or monitoring these jobs), just generic API-level scheduling. Missing for 10: explicit AI-agent-driven automation setup, agent monitoring/adjusting of scheduled tasks, and independent confirmation of reliability of unattended runs.

   • [claimed-docs] “Initiate bank-to-bank payments directly from your customer's account. Single, scheduled, or recurring.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Collect variable recurring payments without re-authorisation each time.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can initiate single, scheduled and periodic payments using Yapily's Payments API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Webhooks allows you to receive real-time HTTP notifications of changes happening in the Yapily Platform.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can track the status of each payment via [Webhooks](/tools-and-services/webhooks/get-started) from the Yapily API for visibility of the …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

3. ai-native userOperate the product with natural-language commands

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Teller—none0/10

   Teller is a banking-data API/SDK product with no evidence of a natural-language command interface, chatbot, or AI-native interaction layer; probes for llms.txt/docs.md/openapi also failed, and no docs mention NL commands or agent interfaces.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://teller.io/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://teller.io/docs.md”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://teller.io/openapi.json, https://teller.io/swagger.json, https://teller.io/api/openapi.json, …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily—none0/10

   Yapily's evidence covers a developer API/SDKs and an MCP-served documentation assistant for coding agents (yapily-docs-6, yapily-probe-3), but there is no evidence that end users can issue natural-language commands to actually operate Yapily's core functions (payments, account data retrieval, etc.). The MCP/llms.txt integration is for helping coding agents navigate docs, not a natural-language control interface for the product's operations.

   • [claimed-docs] “Connect Claude, Cursor, or another AI coding agent directly to these docs via MCP, llms.txt, or Agent Skills.”
   • [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.yapily.com/resources/ai-agents”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Api quality

1. ai-native userExplore an interactive API reference with runnable examples

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Teller—none0/10

   Teller has extensive markdown-based API documentation but no evidence of an interactive reference with runnable examples (e.g., Swagger/OpenAPI explorer). Probes for openapi.json/swagger.json all returned 404, and no docs mention a try-it-now console or code sandbox.

   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://teller.io/openapi.json, https://teller.io/swagger.json, https://teller.io/api/openapi.json, …”
   • [claimed-docs] “Learn about Teller Connect and how to integrate and customize it for you application.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily—none0/10

   No evidence of an interactive API reference or runnable code examples; the OpenAPI spec probe returned 404s and docs only mention static content, code-gen libraries, and AI-agent integration (MCP/llms.txt), not an interactive playground with runnable examples.

   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.yapily.com/openapi.json, https://docs.yapily.com/swagger.json, https://docs.yapily.com/…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Generate API client libraries for Yapily in your preferred language using the OpenAPI specification. Supports code generation for Java, Pyth…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Connect Claude, Cursor, or another AI coding agent directly to these docs via MCP, llms.txt, or Agent Skills.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

2. ai-native userDownload a machine-readable API spec (OpenAPI or equivalent)

   weight 2 · round to Yapily
   Teller—none0/10

   Probes for llms.txt, docs.md, and common OpenAPI/swagger paths all return 404, and no evidence pack item references a downloadable machine-readable spec; documentation is only in prose/markdown form.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://teller.io/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://teller.io/docs.md”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://teller.io/openapi.json, https://teller.io/swagger.json, https://teller.io/api/openapi.json, …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily!disputedcontradicted4/10

   Docs reference an OpenAPI specification used to generate client libraries (yapily-docs-8), implying a machine-readable spec exists, but a direct probe for standard OpenAPI/Swagger file locations returned 404 everywhere (yapily-probe-2), meaning no publicly downloadable spec could be located. missing for 10: a working public URL/download link for the OpenAPI/Swagger file, confirmation of its format and completeness, and independent corroboration that it can actually be fetched.

   • [claimed-docs] “Generate API client libraries for Yapily in your preferred language using the OpenAPI specification. Supports code generation for Java, Pyth…”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.yapily.com/openapi.json, https://docs.yapily.com/swagger.json, https://docs.yapily.com/…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

3. ai-native userTest against a sandbox environment without touching production data

   weight 1 · round drawn
   Teller✓fullclaimed8/10

   Teller documents a dedicated sandbox environment using simulated data that never connects to real financial institutions, with defined test flows (e.g., OTP MFA with code 0000), letting developers test integrations without touching production data or real accounts. Missing for 10: independent/hands-on developer confirmation of sandbox fidelity and no mention of sandbox-specific rate limits or data reset options.

   • [claimed-docs] “The sandbox environment uses simulated data and never connects to real financial institutions.”
   • [claimed-docs] “`otp` () - Will follow an OTP MFA flow whereby the user will be asked to select a contact to send an OTP code. The correct code is `0000`”
   • [claimed-docs] “**100 enrollment limit** — An enrollment represents one bank login, which may include multiple accounts”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily✓fullclaimed8/10

   Yapily explicitly documents a sandbox environment that simulates real Open Banking flows with test accounts/banks so developers can test without touching production data (yapily-docs-12), supported by webhook and API docs for testing flows. Missing for 10: independent/hands-on confirmation of sandbox behavior and explicit detail on data isolation guarantees beyond the doc description.

   • [claimed-docs] “A sandbox is a test environment that allows you to connect your application to a bank and access test accounts to simulate the real Open Ban…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Webhooks allows you to receive real-time HTTP notifications of changes happening in the Yapily Platform.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

4. ai-native userRely on versioned APIs with a documented deprecation policy

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Teller—none0/10

   No evidence of API versioning scheme or a documented deprecation policy anywhere in the docs pack; probes for llms.txt/openapi spec also failed, suggesting no machine-readable API contract either.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://teller.io/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://teller.io/docs.md”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://teller.io/openapi.json, https://teller.io/swagger.json, https://teller.io/api/openapi.json, …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily—none0/10

   No evidence pack items mention API versioning scheme or a documented deprecation policy; docs reference API capabilities, sandbox, webhooks, and client library generation but nothing about version lifecycle or deprecation commitments. missing for 10: versioning scheme documentation, deprecation policy/notice process, changelog or migration guides.

   ⚑ flag

1. ai-native userPerform bulk operations across many items at once

   weight 2 · round to Yapily
   Teller—none0/10

   Teller's docs describe per-item endpoints (single account balances, single transaction list with pagination, single payment with idempotency) but there is no evidence of any batch/bulk endpoint for operating across many accounts, transactions, or payments at once. Pagination controls exist for reading a transaction list, but that is not a bulk operation on multiple items simultaneously.

   • [claimed-docs] “the transactions list endpoint supports pagination controls.”
   • [claimed-docs] “This endpoint supports idempotent requests.”
   • [claimed-docs] “The payments resource allows you to send payments to yourself or a 3rd party on behalf of the end-user from their account. Currently the onl…”
   • [claimed-docs] “The transactions API exposes the ledger transactions of a financial account.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily~partialclaimed4/10

   Yapily's docs mention 'bulk' as a supported payment type alongside scheduled/periodic/international payments, indicating some batch-processing capability, but there is no detailed documentation of bulk API semantics (batch size limits, bulk data retrieval, bulk consent management, etc.) beyond this one-line reference. missing for 10: dedicated bulk API endpoint documentation, batch limits/pagination for data retrieval, examples of bulk operations in practice.

   • [claimed-docs] “Choose this when you need payment types Hosted does not yet support (bulk, scheduled, periodic, international)”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can initiate single, scheduled and periodic payments using Yapily's Payments API.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

2. ai-native userDefine rules that trigger actions automatically on events

   weight 3 · round drawn
   Teller—none0/10

   Teller offers webhooks for event notifications (teller-docs-7, teller-docs-17), but there is no evidence of a rules engine or automation-configuration capability where users can define conditional actions triggered by events — webhook delivery only notifies an external app, it doesn't let a user define trigger-action rules within Teller itself. missing for 10: any rule/condition builder, action templates, or automation configuration UI/API beyond raw webhook event delivery.

   • [claimed-docs] “To register a new webhook, you need to have a URL in your app that Teller can call. You can configure a new webhook from the Teller Dashboar…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Teller sends webhook events when specific conditions or changes are detected in user enrollments or their financial data.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily—none0/10

   Yapily documents webhooks for real-time event notifications, but there is no evidence of a rules engine or mechanism letting users define conditional triggers that automatically execute actions based on events — webhooks only notify, they don't let a user configure 'if X then do Y' automation.

   • [claimed-docs] “Webhooks allows you to receive real-time HTTP notifications of changes happening in the Yapily Platform.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can track the status of each payment via [Webhooks](/tools-and-services/webhooks/get-started) from the Yapily API for visibility of the …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

3. ai-native userSchedule recurring jobs or workflows

   weight 2 · round to Yapily
   Teller—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Yapily~partialclaimed5/10

   Yapily's Payments API explicitly supports scheduled and recurring (periodic/variable recurring) payment initiation, which is a concrete recurring-job capability exposed via API and webhooks for status tracking. However, this is domain-specific (payments only) rather than a general-purpose job/workflow scheduler or automation engine that an AI agent could use to orchestrate arbitrary recurring tasks. Missing for 10: evidence of a generic scheduling/orchestration API or cron-like trigger system beyond payment initiation, and no independent corroboration of this working end-to-end.

   • [claimed-docs] “Initiate bank-to-bank payments directly from your customer's account. Single, scheduled, or recurring.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Collect variable recurring payments without re-authorisation each time.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can initiate single, scheduled and periodic payments using Yapily's Payments API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Choose this when you need payment types Hosted does not yet support (bulk, scheduled, periodic, international)”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can track the status of each payment via [Webhooks](/tools-and-services/webhooks/get-started) from the Yapily API for visibility of the …”
   • [claimed-docs] “Payments are made via local payment rails including Faster Payments in the UK and SEPA in Europe for fast settlement”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Ach details

1. developerObtain verified account and routing numbers (or tokenized equivalents) from a linked account to fund ACH or bank-debit payments without micro-deposits

   weight 3 · round to Teller
   Teller~partialclaimed7/10

   Teller's docs describe an account-details endpoint providing verified account/routing numbers with instant verification for 7,000+ institutions, explicitly positioned to avoid microdeposits, with balances API used to confirm funds before ACH debit. However the same docs show a same-day microdeposit fallback is still required for institutions outside instant coverage, and there is no independent/hands-on confirmation of the instant-verification success rate or that routing numbers are tokenized rather than plaintext. missing for 10: independent corroboration of instant verification working in practice, clarity on tokenization vs raw account/routing number exposure, and confirmation that non-covered institutions aren't a common real-world limitation.

   • [claimed-docs] “To access account details from these institutions, you can implement the 'Verify Account Details via Microdeposit' flow.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Connect instantly with more than 7,000 financial institutions and fall back to same-day ACH microdeposit verification for everyone else.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Guaranteed live account balances. Used for underwriting or ensuring sufficient funds are available before submitting an ACH debit.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Identity provides you with all of the accounts the end-user granted your application access authorization along with beneficial owner identi…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

Balances

1. developerFetch a real-time balance for a connected account before initiating a payment — a documented balance endpoint intended for NSF and risk checks

   weight 3 · round to Teller
   Teller✓fullclaimed9/10

   Teller's docs explicitly provide a dedicated real-time balances API endpoint, and marketing/docs copy directly frames it for underwriting/NSF risk checks before submitting an ACH debit, matching the story precisely. Missing for 10: no independent/hands-on developer confirmation of the balance endpoint's real-time accuracy or latency in production.

   • [claimed-docs] “The account balances API provides your application with live, real-time account balances.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Guaranteed live account balances. Used for underwriting or ensuring sufficient funds are available before submitting an ACH debit.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Teller lets users connect their accounts in seconds, and you verify account ownership, ACH details, balances, and transactions with ease.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily✓fullclaimed7/10

   Yapily's Data API explicitly documents retrieving account balances (via AIS/Open Banking) alongside accounts and transactions, which is the core capability needed for pre-payment balance checks. Missing for 10: explicit 'real-time' latency guarantees and explicit framing of the endpoint for NSF/risk-check use cases.

   • [claimed-docs] “Retrieve accounts, balances, and transactions with user consent.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Using Yapily's Data API you can access your customers' financial data including account balances, transaction history and account details to…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Ownership

1. ops leadRetrieve account-holder details — names, addresses, contact data on file at the bank — to match the account owner against my customer

   weight 2 · round to Teller
   Teller✓fullclaimed8/10

   Teller's Identity API explicitly returns beneficial owner identity information for each authorized account, directly matching the story's need to retrieve account-holder names/identity data for owner matching (teller-docs-4, teller-docs-19), and the docs message frames account ownership verification as a core use case (teller-docs-1). Missing for 10: explicit confirmation that address/contact fields (not just legal name) are included in the Identity payload, and independent/hands-on corroboration beyond vendor docs.

   • [claimed-docs] “Identity provides you with all of the accounts the end-user granted your application access authorization along with beneficial owner identi…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Identity provides you with all of the accounts the end-user granted your application access authorization along with beneficial owner identi…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Teller lets users connect their accounts in seconds, and you verify account ownership, ACH details, balances, and transactions with ease.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily✓fullclaimed7/10

   Yapily explicitly documents confirming account ownership and retrieving customer details, plus broader Data API access to account details/balances for identity matching purposes. Missing for 10: no explicit breakdown of which fields (name, address, contact) are returned, and no independent/hands-on corroboration beyond first-party docs.

   • [claimed-docs] “Confirm account ownership and customer details instantly.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Using Yapily's Data API you can access your customers' financial data including account balances, transaction history and account details to…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Retrieve accounts, balances, and transactions with user consent.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Processor tokens

1. developerLinked accounts plug into my payment processor — documented integrations or token exchange that hand verified account credentials to third-party processors and platforms

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Teller—none0/10

   Teller's docs describe its own Payments resource (Zelle transfers) and Identity/Balances APIs, but there is no documented processor-token exchange or integration flow that hands verified account credentials to third-party payment processors/platforms (e.g., a Stripe/Dwolla-style processor token). Community threads even confirm Teller does not enable moving money to arbitrary third parties beyond its own Zelle feature.

   • [claimed-docs] “The payments resource allows you to send payments to yourself or a 3rd party on behalf of the end-user from their account. Currently the onl…”
   • [claimed-docs] “The payments resource allows you to send payments to yourself or a 3rd party on behalf of the end-user from their account.”
   • [community] “Founder response: 'FWIW it is not currently possible for users to move money with Teller... Our terms are comparable to the incumbent screen…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily—none0/10

   Yapily's docs describe account verification and payment initiation via its own Payments/Data APIs, but there is no evidence of documented integrations or token-exchange mechanisms that hand verified account credentials to third-party payment processors or platforms.

   ⚑ flag

Agent data

1. ai-native userThe data comes back agent-consumable — clean structured JSON, documented schemas, and enrichment an automated financial workflow can reason over without heuristic parsing

   weight 2 · round to Teller
   Teller~partialprobed6/10

   Teller's docs describe a REST API with well-defined resources (balances, transactions, identity, payments) and some enrichment like transaction categorization, pagination, and idempotency, suggesting structured, documented data an app could parse programmatically. However, there is no evidence of a machine-readable schema (OpenAPI/swagger) or llms.txt for agent discovery—probes show all such endpoints 404—so an AI agent would have to rely on human-oriented docs rather than a formal schema. missing for 10: machine-readable OpenAPI/schema files, llms.txt or agent-specific docs, richer enrichment metadata (e.g., merchant/location tags) beyond basic categorization.

   • [claimed-docs] “The account balances API provides your application with live, real-time account balances.”
   • [claimed-docs] “The transactions API exposes the ledger transactions of a financial account.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Identity provides you with all of the accounts the end-user granted your application access authorization along with beneficial owner identi…”
   • [claimed-docs] “the category that the transaction belongs to. Teller uses the following values for categorization”
   • [claimed-docs] “This endpoint supports idempotent requests.”
   • [claimed-docs] “the transactions list endpoint supports pagination controls.”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://teller.io/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://teller.io/docs.md”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://teller.io/openapi.json, https://teller.io/swagger.json, https://teller.io/api/openapi.json, …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily~partialprobed5/10

   Docs show enrichment (merchant detection, spending insights) and a Data API returning structured account/transaction/balance data, plus OpenAPI-based client generation implying documented schemas (yapily-docs-3, yapily-docs-2, yapily-docs-8, yapily-docs-15). However, a probe found the openapi.json/swagger.json spec not resolvable at standard paths, casting doubt on how discoverable the machine-readable schema actually is, and no evidence pack item shows an actual JSON response sample or schema definition. Missing for 10: concrete JSON response examples/schema snippets, confirmation of a publicly resolvable OpenAPI spec, and explicit statement that enrichment fields are machine-parseable without heuristics.

   • [claimed-docs] “Retrieve accounts, balances, and transactions with user consent.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Categorise and analyse transaction data with merchant detection and spending insights.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Generate API client libraries for Yapily in your preferred language using the OpenAPI specification. Supports code generation for Java, Pyth…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Using Yapily's Data API you can access your customers' financial data including account balances, transaction history and account details to…”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.yapily.com/openapi.json, https://docs.yapily.com/swagger.json, https://docs.yapily.com/…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Agent operations

1. ai-native userAn agent can operate the platform — create link sessions, retrieve balances and transactions, and manage connections through the API or an MCP surface with scoped credentials

   weight 3 · round drawn
   Teller~partialprobed4/10

   Teller's REST API supports the core primitives (balances, transactions, identity, connect/link sessions via Teller Connect, mTLS-scoped credentials) that an agent could call, but there is no evidence of an MCP server, agent-oriented SDK, or machine-readable API spec — probes for llms.txt, docs.md, and openapi.json all returned 404, indicating no first-class AI-agent integration surface. missing for 10: an MCP server or agent tool-calling interface, machine-readable OpenAPI/llms.txt discovery, and any documentation framing agent-driven scoped access.

   • [claimed-docs] “Teller lets users connect their accounts in seconds, and you verify account ownership, ACH details, balances, and transactions with ease.”
   • [claimed-docs] “The account balances API provides your application with live, real-time account balances.”
   • [claimed-docs] “The transactions API exposes the ledger transactions of a financial account.”
   • [claimed-docs] “The Teller API uses mTLS to authenticate the API caller. Teller issues client certificates that you use to connect to the Teller API.”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 404 at https://teller.io/llms.txt”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 404 at https://teller.io/docs.md”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://teller.io/openapi.json, https://teller.io/swagger.json, https://teller.io/api/openapi.json, …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily~partialprobed4/10

   Yapily's API clearly supports creating consent/link sessions, retrieving balances/transactions, and managing connections (yapily-docs-2, -7, -9, -15), and there is an MCP surface (yapily-docs-6, yapily-probe-3) — but that MCP is documented as connecting coding agents (Claude/Cursor) to the documentation, not as an operational interface for agents to actually invoke banking actions with scoped credentials. Missing for 10: evidence of an MCP tool surface that performs live API calls (link sessions, balance/transaction retrieval) rather than just docs access, and explicit scoped-credential/agent-auth model for such calls.

   • [claimed-docs] “Retrieve accounts, balances, and transactions with user consent.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Yapily Connect provides a ready-built, white-label open banking UI for AIS and PIS flows. Reduce development effort with pre-built instituti…”
   • [claimed-docs] “No frontend engineering required for consent and authorisation flows”
   • [claimed-docs] “Using Yapily's Data API you can access your customers' financial data including account balances, transaction history and account details to…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Connect Claude, Cursor, or another AI coding agent directly to these docs via MCP, llms.txt, or Agent Skills.”
   • [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.yapily.com/resources/ai-agents”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Consent

1. ops leadEnd users can see and revoke what they've shared — a documented consent surface or portal where a user manages which apps hold access to their bank data

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Teller—none0/10

   No evidence of an end-user consent dashboard or portal where users can view or revoke third-party app access to their bank data; docs cover enrollment, data APIs, webhooks, and auth but nothing about consent management/revocation UI. Missing for 10: a documented end-user consent portal, revocation flow/API, and any independent confirmation of such a surface.

   • [claimed-docs] “finish up by linking your first financial accounts to Teller.”
   • [claimed-docs] “**100 enrollment limit** — An enrollment represents one bank login, which may include multiple accounts”
   • [claimed-docs] “Learn about Teller Connect and how to integrate and customize it for you application.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily—none0/10

   Evidence shows Yapily Connect provides consent screens for initiating AIS/PIS authorization (docs-7, docs-20) but nothing about a portal or surface where end users can view all apps/connections and actively revoke previously granted consent to their bank data.

   ⚑ flag

Deletion

1. ops leadSever and clean up — a documented way to delete a connection or user and have the platform stop collecting and purge held data

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Teller—none0/10

   No evidence in the pack documents a deletion/disconnection flow, data purge process, or user/connection removal API — the docs focus on connecting, verifying, and retrieving financial data (balances, transactions, identity, payments) with no mention of offboarding or data deletion mechanics.

   ⚑ flag

   Yapily—none0/10

   No evidence describes a documented deletion/revocation flow for connections or users, nor confirmation that data collection stops and held data is purged; docs only mention consent collection, sandbox, webhooks, and data retrieval, not consent revocation or data deletion/purge.

   ⚑ flag

Scopes

1. developerI request only the data scopes I need — product-scoped consents and documented data-minimization controls, not an all-or-nothing grant

   weight 2 · round to Yapily
   Teller—none0/10

   The evidence describes separate API resources (balances, transactions, identity, payments) but there is no documentation of a consent flow where developers can request only specific scopes or where end-users see a product-scoped grant rather than an all-or-nothing authorization. No mention of a 'products' parameter, granular permission toggles, or data-minimization consent screen in Teller Connect.

   • [claimed-docs] “Teller lets users connect their accounts in seconds, and you verify account ownership, ACH details, balances, and transactions with ease.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Identity provides you with all of the accounts the end-user granted your application access authorization along with beneficial owner identi…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Identity provides you with all of the accounts the end-user granted your application access authorization along with beneficial owner identi…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Learn about Teller Connect and how to integrate and customize it for you application.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily~partialclaimed5/10

   Yapily separates its offerings into distinct products (Data API for AIS, Payments API for PIS, account confirmation, VRP) each with its own consent screen, implying developers only request the product-specific consent they need rather than a single blanket grant (yapily-docs-2, -15, -16, -20). However, there is no explicit documentation of fine-grained data-minimization controls within a product (e.g., requesting balances only vs. full transaction history) or scope parameters in the API reference. missing for 10: granular in-product scope/field-level consent documentation, explicit data-minimization API parameters, independent confirmation of scope enforcement.

   • [claimed-docs] “Retrieve accounts, balances, and transactions with user consent.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Using Yapily's Data API you can access your customers' financial data including account balances, transaction history and account details to…”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can initiate single, scheduled and periodic payments using Yapily's Payments API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “UX design guidelines for Yapily Connect AIS flows. Best practices for institution selection, consent screens, and account selection for data…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Refresh

1. developerTrigger an on-demand refresh of a connected account's data through the API when my use case needs now-fresh data, with the refresh semantics documented

   weight 2 · round to Teller
   Teller~partialclaimed4/10

   Teller's balances API is documented as returning "live, real-time account balances" (teller-docs-2, teller-docs-22), implying each API call effectively refreshes data on demand, and webhooks fire on data changes (teller-docs-7, teller-docs-17). However, there is no dedicated refresh/sync endpoint, no documented semantics for how or when transaction data is refreshed, and no explanation of caching or refresh triggers for the transactions API — missing for 10: a documented refresh endpoint/mechanism, explicit refresh semantics (latency, staleness window), and confirmation for transactions data (not just balances).

   • [claimed-docs] “The account balances API provides your application with live, real-time account balances.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Guaranteed live account balances. Used for underwriting or ensuring sufficient funds are available before submitting an ACH debit.”
   • [claimed-docs] “To register a new webhook, you need to have a URL in your app that Teller can call. You can configure a new webhook from the Teller Dashboar…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Teller sends webhook events when specific conditions or changes are detected in user enrollments or their financial data.”
   • [claimed-docs] “The transactions API exposes the ledger transactions of a financial account.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily—none0/10

   Evidence covers account data retrieval, webhooks for real-time notifications, and payments, but nothing describes an on-demand refresh endpoint/parameter or documents refresh semantics (e.g., how often data updates or how to force a refresh). Missing for 10: any mention of a refresh API/endpoint, refresh frequency/rate limits, or documented semantics for on-demand data freshness.

   • [claimed-docs] “Retrieve accounts, balances, and transactions with user consent.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Webhooks allows you to receive real-time HTTP notifications of changes happening in the Yapily Platform.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Using Yapily's Data API you can access your customers' financial data including account balances, transaction history and account details to…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Webhooks

1. developerData changes arrive as signed webhooks — new transactions, balance updates, connection state changes — so my system stays current without polling

   weight 2 · round to Yapily
   Teller~partialclaimed5/10

   Teller docs confirm webhook events exist for enrollment/data changes (teller-docs-17) and describe how to register a webhook URL (teller-docs-7), covering the general 'push not poll' data-freshness goal. However, the evidence pack contains no mention of webhook payload signing/verification mechanism, nor independent confirmation that webhooks reliably fire for transactions, balances, and connection-state changes as described. Missing for 10: explicit signature/verification scheme for webhooks, documented list of event types (transaction created, balance updated, enrollment disconnected), and third-party/hands-on confirmation of webhook delivery reliability.

   • [claimed-docs] “To register a new webhook, you need to have a URL in your app that Teller can call. You can configure a new webhook from the Teller Dashboar…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Teller sends webhook events when specific conditions or changes are detected in user enrollments or their financial data.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily~partialclaimed6/10

   Yapily documents webhooks for real-time HTTP notifications of platform changes, explicitly used for payment status tracking, supporting event-driven updates instead of polling. However, the evidence never confirms webhook payloads are cryptographically signed, nor details specific coverage for new transactions/balance updates/connection state changes as separate event types. Missing for 10: signature/verification mechanism documentation, explicit event types for transactions/balances/connection state, and independent confirmation of reliability.

   • [claimed-docs] “Webhooks allows you to receive real-time HTTP notifications of changes happening in the Yapily Platform.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can track the status of each payment via [Webhooks](/tools-and-services/webhooks/get-started) from the Yapily API for visibility of the …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Coverage

1. founderThe platform documents how many institutions it reaches and where — published coverage numbers and geographies I can check against where my users actually bank

   weight 3 · round to Teller
   Teller~partialcommunity3/10

   Teller publishes a single aggregate figure ("more than 7,000 financial institutions") but no breakdown by geography, no searchable list of supported institutions, and no way for a founder to verify coverage against their specific user base. The old community thread references only a handful of UK banks, but this appears to be from an earlier version of the product and is not directly comparable to the current 7,000+ claim. missing for 10: geographic breakdown, institution-name list/coverage tool, independent verification of the 7,000 figure.

   • [claimed-docs] “Connect instantly with more than 7,000 financial institutions and fall back to same-day ACH microdeposit verification for everyone else.”
   • [community] “Teller is available today for Santander UK, Barclays, Natwest, Nationwide, RBS, Isle of Man Bank, and Ulster Bank.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily—none0/10

   The evidence pack contains no published institution counts, geographic coverage lists, or bank-name directories that a founder could check against their users' banks—only product/API feature descriptions.

   ⚑ flag

Status

1. ops leadPer-institution health is visible — documented institution statuses, outage or degradation signals, and error codes that distinguish a bank problem from my problem

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Teller—none0/10

   No evidence of a status page, per-institution outage/degradation signals, or documented error codes distinguishing bank-side failures from client-side errors. Webhooks are mentioned for enrollment/data change events, but nothing ties to institution health visibility or error taxonomy.

   ⚑ flag

   Yapily—none0/10

   No evidence of a documented institution status page, outage/degradation signals, or error-code taxonomy distinguishing bank-side failures from client-side issues; only generic webhook and payment-status mentions are present. Missing for 10: institution status/availability page, degradation/outage signals, and documented bank-vs-integration error code distinctions.

   • [claimed-docs] “You can track the status of each payment via [Webhooks](/tools-and-services/webhooks/get-started) from the Yapily API for visibility of the …”
   • [claimed-docs] “Webhooks allows you to receive real-time HTTP notifications of changes happening in the Yapily Platform.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Multi product

1. developerOne link session can power multiple data products — auth, balances, transactions, identity — without forcing the user through separate connection flows per product

   weight 2 · round to Teller
   Teller✓fullclaimed7/10

   Teller's architecture centers on a single enrollment/access-token granted via one Connect flow, which then powers balances, transactions, identity, and account-details APIs (teller-docs-1, teller-docs-4/19 note identity covers 'all accounts the end-user granted access authorization', teller-docs-13 defines an enrollment as one bank login with multiple accounts). This implies a single link session unlocks multiple data products without repeated connect flows. missing for 10: an explicit statement confirming no re-authentication is needed per product, and independent/hands-on developer corroboration of this multi-product single-session behavior.

   • [claimed-docs] “Teller lets users connect their accounts in seconds, and you verify account ownership, ACH details, balances, and transactions with ease.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Identity provides you with all of the accounts the end-user granted your application access authorization along with beneficial owner identi…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Identity provides you with all of the accounts the end-user granted your application access authorization along with beneficial owner identi…”
   • [claimed-docs] “**100 enrollment limit** — An enrollment represents one bank login, which may include multiple accounts”
   • [claimed-docs] “The account balances API provides your application with live, real-time account balances.”
   • [claimed-docs] “The transactions API exposes the ledger transactions of a financial account.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily~partialclaimed6/10

   Yapily's Data API and consent flow (via Yapily Connect) grant access to accounts, balances, transactions, and identity data under a single AIS consent/session (yapily-docs-2, yapily-docs-4, yapily-docs-15, yapily-docs-20), and Yapily Connect explicitly reduces repeated consent screens across flows (yapily-docs-7, yapily-docs-9). However, payments (PIS) are documented as a separate initiation flow/API from data access (AIS), and no evidence explicitly confirms a single link/consent session spans both AIS and PIS products without re-authentication. missing for 10: explicit confirmation that one consent/session token covers both payments and data products together, and independent/hands-on evidence of a true single multi-product session rather than per-product consent screens.

   • [claimed-docs] “Retrieve accounts, balances, and transactions with user consent.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Confirm account ownership and customer details instantly.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Yapily Connect provides a ready-built, white-label open banking UI for AIS and PIS flows. Reduce development effort with pre-built instituti…”
   • [claimed-docs] “No frontend engineering required for consent and authorisation flows”
   • [claimed-docs] “Using Yapily's Data API you can access your customers' financial data including account balances, transaction history and account details to…”
   • [claimed-docs] “UX design guidelines for Yapily Connect AIS flows. Best practices for institution selection, consent screens, and account selection for data…”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can initiate single, scheduled and periodic payments using Yapily's Payments API.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Quickstart

1. developerGo from signup to my first linked sandbox account fast — self-serve API keys, a runnable quickstart, and client libraries in my language

   weight 2 · round to Teller
   Teller~partialclaimed5/10

   Docs confirm a quickstart guide that ends with linking a first sandbox account, a dedicated sandbox environment with simulated data and OTP test flows, and at least one client library (React hook/component) for Teller Connect. However, authentication requires mTLS with client certificates rather than a simple self-serve API key (raising integration friction), and there's no evidence of client libraries beyond React or of a fast self-serve signup process for keys/certs. Missing for 10: explicit self-serve API-key/signup flow, additional-language client libraries (Node/Python/etc.), independent hands-on confirmation of speed from quickstart to first linked sandbox account.

   • [claimed-docs] “finish up by linking your first financial accounts to Teller.”
   • [claimed-docs] “The sandbox environment uses simulated data and never connects to real financial institutions.”
   • [claimed-docs] “`otp` () - Will follow an OTP MFA flow whereby the user will be asked to select a contact to send an OTP code. The correct code is `0000`”
   • [claimed-docs] “The Teller API uses mTLS to authenticate the API caller. Teller issues client certificates that you use to connect to the Teller API.”
   • [github] “React hook and component for integrating with Teller Connect”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily~partialprobed4/10

   Evidence confirms a sandbox test environment (yapily-docs-12) and client library generation via OpenAPI spec for Java, Python, Node.js, etc. (yapily-docs-8), but there is no evidence of a self-serve signup flow, API key issuance process, or a runnable quickstart guide. The openapi.json probe returned 404s across all candidate paths, casting doubt on how straightforward the client-library generation actually is in practice. missing for 10: self-serve signup/API-key evidence, an explicit quickstart walkthrough, working OpenAPI spec endpoint, independent corroboration of time-to-first-sandbox-account.

   • [claimed-docs] “A sandbox is a test environment that allows you to connect your application to a bank and access test accounts to simulate the real Open Ban…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Generate API client libraries for Yapily in your preferred language using the OpenAPI specification. Supports code generation for Java, Pyth…”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.yapily.com/openapi.json, https://docs.yapily.com/swagger.json, https://docs.yapily.com/…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Sandbox

1. developerA sandbox with test institutions and documented test credentials lets me exercise linking, data retrieval, and error states end-to-end before touching a real bank account

   weight 3 · round to Teller
   Teller✓fullclaimed8/10

   Docs confirm a sandbox environment with simulated data that never touches real institutions, plus documented test credentials/flows (e.g., OTP MFA code '0000'), and full documented APIs for linking, balances, transactions, identity, and payments that can be exercised in sandbox. Missing for 10: independent/hands-on developer accounts specifically validating the sandbox test-credential workflow and documented error-state simulation beyond MFA.

   • [claimed-docs] “The sandbox environment uses simulated data and never connects to real financial institutions.”
   • [claimed-docs] “`otp` () - Will follow an OTP MFA flow whereby the user will be asked to select a contact to send an OTP code. The correct code is `0000`”
   • [claimed-docs] “The account balances API provides your application with live, real-time account balances.”
   • [claimed-docs] “The transactions API exposes the ledger transactions of a financial account.”
   • [claimed-docs] “**100 enrollment limit** — An enrollment represents one bank login, which may include multiple accounts”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily~partialclaimed6/10

   Docs confirm a sandbox exists to connect to test banks and simulate the Open Banking experience, but the evidence pack doesn't detail documented test credentials, specific error-state simulation, or step-by-step end-to-end linking/retrieval walkthroughs. missing for 10: explicit test credentials list, error/edge-case simulation documentation, independent/hands-on confirmation of the sandbox experience.

   • [claimed-docs] “A sandbox is a test environment that allows you to connect your application to a bank and access test accounts to simulate the real Open Ban…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

1. ai-native userDo everything through the API that I can do in the UI

   weight 2 · round to Yapily
   Teller~partialclaimed5/10

   Teller exposes rich API endpoints for balances, transactions, identity, payments, and account details (teller-docs-2,3,4,5,6), suggesting most financial data operations are API-driven, but account linking is done through the Teller Connect UI widget and webhook registration is explicitly described as being configured 'from the Teller Dashboard' rather than via an API endpoint (teller-docs-7), indicating some UI-only actions lack documented API equivalents. Missing for 10: an API endpoint for webhook/enrollment management equivalent to Dashboard actions, explicit documentation confirming full API/UI parity, and independent confirmation of no UI-exclusive features.

   • [claimed-docs] “The account balances API provides your application with live, real-time account balances.”
   • [claimed-docs] “The transactions API exposes the ledger transactions of a financial account.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Identity provides you with all of the accounts the end-user granted your application access authorization along with beneficial owner identi…”
   • [claimed-docs] “The payments resource allows you to send payments to yourself or a 3rd party on behalf of the end-user from their account. Currently the onl…”
   • [claimed-docs] “To access account details from these institutions, you can implement the 'Verify Account Details via Microdeposit' flow.”
   • [claimed-docs] “To register a new webhook, you need to have a URL in your app that Teller can call. You can configure a new webhook from the Teller Dashboar…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Learn about Teller Connect and how to integrate and customize it for you application.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily~partialprobed6/10

   Yapily's UI (Yapily Connect) is explicitly described as a pre-built white-label layer for AIS/PIS flows that sits on top of the same Data and Payments APIs (docs-7, docs-9, docs-15, docs-16), implying most UI functionality is API-backed rather than API-exclusive. However, there is no explicit documentation stating full UI/API parity, and a probe found no discoverable OpenAPI spec at expected locations, raising doubt about complete self-service API coverage. Missing for 10: explicit parity statement enumerating any UI-only conveniences (e.g., branding, consent screen customization) and their API equivalents, and a working public OpenAPI spec confirming full endpoint coverage.

   • [claimed-docs] “Yapily Connect provides a ready-built, white-label open banking UI for AIS and PIS flows. Reduce development effort with pre-built instituti…”
   • [claimed-docs] “No frontend engineering required for consent and authorisation flows”
   • [claimed-docs] “Using Yapily's Data API you can access your customers' financial data including account balances, transaction history and account details to…”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can initiate single, scheduled and periodic payments using Yapily's Payments API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Generate API client libraries for Yapily in your preferred language using the OpenAPI specification. Supports code generation for Java, Pyth…”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.yapily.com/openapi.json, https://docs.yapily.com/swagger.json, https://docs.yapily.com/…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

2. ai-native userExport all of my data in open formats and leave

   weight 3 · round to Teller
   Teller~partialcommunity3/10

   Teller exposes account balances/transactions/identity via JSON API (open format), and a community member built a third-party script exporting Teller data to CSV/QIF, showing data can be extracted. However there is no first-party 'export all my data and leave' feature, no bulk data-export or account-deletion tooling, and no documentation of full data portability for end users. Missing for 10: official bulk export/download-all-data feature, documented account closure/data portability process, and independent confirmation beyond one hobbyist script.

   • [community] “I built a little script to export my accounts to CSV/QIF. Super easy to use API! https://github.com/scottrobertson/teller-export”
   • [claimed-docs] “The account balances API provides your application with live, real-time account balances.”
   • [claimed-docs] “The transactions API exposes the ledger transactions of a financial account.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Identity provides you with all of the accounts the end-user granted your application access authorization along with beneficial owner identi…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

3. ai-native userRead the product's source under an open license

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Teller—none0/10

   Teller is a closed, proprietary financial API/service; the only open-source artifact found is a client-side React SDK wrapper (teller-connect-react), not the product's core source. A community comment explicitly wishes Teller were open source, implying it is not, and no license or source-availability claims appear in vendor docs.

   • [github] “React hook and component for integrating with Teller Connect”
   • [community] “I'd much prefer that this were just open source so I don't have to share my bank credentials.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily—none0/10

   Yapily is a closed commercial open banking API/SaaS platform; there is no evidence of any open-source license or public source repository for its core product. Documentation and OpenAPI probes exist but source code openness is not evidenced anywhere in the pack.

   ⚑ flag

Pay by bank

1. developerInitiate a bank payment from a connected account — a documented pay-by-bank or payment-initiation product with its live geographies stated honestly

   weight 2 · round to Yapily
   Teller~partialclaimed5/10

   Teller docs confirm a payments API that lets a developer send a payment from a connected account to self or a third party, with idempotency support (teller-docs-5, teller-docs-18, teller-docs-20), and separately state broad institution coverage (7,000+ US institutions) for account connectivity (teller-docs-11). However, the payments API explicitly supports only the Zelle scheme currently, not general ACH/bank-transfer payment initiation, and there is no explicit geography statement scoped to the payments product itself (vs. the broader account-linking coverage claim). Missing for 10: multi-rail payment initiation beyond Zelle, an explicit payments-specific geography/eligibility statement, and independent/hands-on confirmation that payment initiation works live in production.

   • [claimed-docs] “The payments resource allows you to send payments to yourself or a 3rd party on behalf of the end-user from their account. Currently the onl…”
   • [claimed-docs] “The payments resource allows you to send payments to yourself or a 3rd party on behalf of the end-user from their account.”
   • [claimed-docs] “This endpoint supports idempotent requests.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Connect instantly with more than 7,000 financial institutions and fall back to same-day ACH microdeposit verification for everyone else.”
   • [claimed-docs] “**100 enrollment limit** — An enrollment represents one bank login, which may include multiple accounts”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily~partialclaimed6/10

   Yapily's docs clearly describe payment initiation (single, scheduled, periodic, recurring/VRP) via its Payments API using local rails like UK Faster Payments and European SEPA, giving some geographic grounding, but there is no comprehensive, explicit list of supported countries/markets or independent confirmation of live coverage claims. missing for 10: full country/geography list, independent verification of live markets, and any hands-on confirmation of payment success rates.

   • [claimed-docs] “Initiate bank-to-bank payments directly from your customer's account. Single, scheduled, or recurring.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can initiate single, scheduled and periodic payments using Yapily's Payments API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Choose this when you need payment types Hosted does not yet support (bulk, scheduled, periodic, international)”
   • [claimed-docs] “Payments are made via local payment rails including Faster Payments in the UK and SEPA in Europe for fast settlement”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can track the status of each payment via [Webhooks](/tools-and-services/webhooks/get-started) from the Yapily API for visibility of the …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Recurring

1. developerRecurring bank payments are supported — variable recurring payments, standing consents, or documented recurring debit flows built on the connection

   weight 2 · round to Yapily
   Teller—none0/10

   Teller's payments resource only supports Zelle-based payments to self or third parties; there is no mention of variable recurring payments, standing consents, or documented recurring debit flows.

   • [claimed-docs] “The payments resource allows you to send payments to yourself or a 3rd party on behalf of the end-user from their account. Currently the onl…”
   • [claimed-docs] “The payments resource allows you to send payments to yourself or a 3rd party on behalf of the end-user from their account.”
   • [claimed-docs] “This endpoint supports idempotent requests.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily✓fullclaimed8/10

   Docs explicitly cover recurring/scheduled/periodic payments (yapily-docs-1, -16, -17) and dedicated variable recurring payment support without re-authorisation (yapily-docs-5), plus webhook-based status tracking and local rail settlement for recurring debits (yapily-docs-18, -21). Missing for 10: independent/hands-on confirmation of VRP flows in production and more detail on standing consent lifecycle management beyond docs claims.

   • [claimed-docs] “Initiate bank-to-bank payments directly from your customer's account. Single, scheduled, or recurring.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Collect variable recurring payments without re-authorisation each time.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can initiate single, scheduled and periodic payments using Yapily's Payments API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Choose this when you need payment types Hosted does not yet support (bulk, scheduled, periodic, international)”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can track the status of each payment via [Webhooks](/tools-and-services/webhooks/get-started) from the Yapily API for visibility of the …”
   • [claimed-docs] “Payments are made via local payment rails including Faster Payments in the UK and SEPA in Europe for fast settlement”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

1. ai-native userChoose where my data is stored (region/residency)

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Teller—none0/10

   No evidence of any data residency/region selection controls in Teller's docs or community discussion; the pack covers account linking, payments, mTLS auth, and webhooks but nothing about data storage location choice.

   ⚑ flag

   Yapily—none0/10

   No evidence in the pack addresses data residency, regional storage choice, or hosting location options for customer data; all docs focus on payments, data access APIs, and AI-agent connectivity.

   ⚑ flag

2. ai-native userControl data retention and deletion

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Teller—none0/10

   No evidence anywhere in the pack addresses data retention policies, deletion controls, or data lifecycle management for end-user financial data; docs cover connectivity, API resources, auth, and webhooks but nothing on retention/deletion controls.

   ⚑ flag

   Yapily—none0/10

   No evidence in the pack addresses data retention policies, deletion controls, or user-initiated data removal options for Yapily; the documentation covers data access, payments, and AI-agent integration but nothing about retention/deletion controls.

   ⚑ flag

Cashflow

1. finance leadThe platform derives income and cash-flow signals from connected accounts — recurring streams, payroll detection, or documented income verification products built on the same data

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Teller—none0/10

   Teller's docs cover balances, transactions, categorization, and identity, but no evidence describes recurring-stream detection, payroll detection, or an income-verification product built on the transaction data — this is a fair axis for an account-aggregation platform but unaddressed in the evidence pack.

   ⚑ flag

   Yapily—none0/10

   Yapily's docs show transaction categorisation, merchant detection, and spending insights (yapily-docs-3), but there is no evidence of recurring income/payroll detection, cash-flow signal derivation, or income verification products built on the data.

   ⚑ flag

Enrichment

1. developerRaw bank transactions come back enriched — cleaned merchant names, categories, and logos — documented as a capability of the platform, not left as an exercise for me

   weight 2 · round to Yapily
   Teller~partialclaimed4/10

   Docs confirm the transactions API includes categorization of transactions (teller-docs-16, teller-docs-3), but there is no documented evidence of merchant name cleaning/normalization or merchant logos as a platform capability. missing for 10: documented merchant-name cleaning, logo enrichment, independent corroboration of enrichment quality.

   • [claimed-docs] “the category that the transaction belongs to. Teller uses the following values for categorization”
   • [claimed-docs] “The transactions API exposes the ledger transactions of a financial account.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily~partialclaimed6/10

   Docs explicitly claim categorisation, merchant detection, and spending insights on transaction data (yapily-docs-3, yapily-docs-15), directly supporting enrichment as a documented platform capability rather than a DIY task. However, no evidence specifically documents merchant logo enrichment or detailed 'cleaned name' normalization, and there's no independent/hands-on confirmation of enrichment quality. Missing for 10: explicit logo enrichment documentation, detail on merchant name cleaning methodology, third-party/hands-on validation of enrichment accuracy.

   • [claimed-docs] “Categorise and analyse transaction data with merchant detection and spending insights.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Using Yapily's Data API you can access your customers' financial data including account balances, transaction history and account details to…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Transactions

1. developerPull transaction history for a connected account through the API — paginated, with documented history depth and a sync pattern for fetching only what changed

   weight 3 · round to Teller
   Teller~partialcommunity6/10

   Docs confirm a transactions API with pagination support and category enrichment, plus webhooks that fire on data changes (a plausible 'fetch only what changed' mechanism), and a community report of successfully exporting transaction history via the API. However, there's no documented statement of how far back transaction history extends, and no explicit incremental-sync/cursor endpoint beyond generic webhook notifications. Missing for 10: documented history depth/lookback window, an explicit delta-sync or cursor-based endpoint (not just webhooks) for changed transactions.

   • [claimed-docs] “The transactions API exposes the ledger transactions of a financial account.”
   • [claimed-docs] “the transactions list endpoint supports pagination controls.”
   • [claimed-docs] “the category that the transaction belongs to. Teller uses the following values for categorization”
   • [claimed-docs] “Teller sends webhook events when specific conditions or changes are detected in user enrollments or their financial data.”
   • [claimed-docs] “To register a new webhook, you need to have a URL in your app that Teller can call. You can configure a new webhook from the Teller Dashboar…”
   • [community] “I built a little script to export my accounts to CSV/QIF. Super easy to use API! https://github.com/scottrobertson/teller-export”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Yapily~partialclaimed4/10

   Docs confirm transaction/account/balance retrieval via the Data API with consent (yapily-docs-2, yapily-docs-15) and webhooks for real-time change notifications (yapily-docs-13), which could support a sync pattern, but there is no documented pagination mechanism, no stated history depth/lookback window, and no explicit delta/incremental-fetch API for transactions. missing for 10: pagination details, documented transaction history depth, explicit changed-only/delta sync endpoint or pattern beyond generic webhooks.

   • [claimed-docs] “Retrieve accounts, balances, and transactions with user consent.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Using Yapily's Data API you can access your customers' financial data including account balances, transaction history and account details to…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Webhooks allows you to receive real-time HTTP notifications of changes happening in the Yapily Platform.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag