Confidence in 0,1. A processor chargeback is 1; an analyst's hunch is not. It breaks a tie WITHIN a precedence rank and can never lift a weak source above a strong one — otherwise every caller would send 1. A litigation hold is NOT a field here. It is a fact about the record and not about the world, so it is not part of what was asserted, it is not in the content digest, and it has its own op — which is also the only way one can be released. Carried here it was silently a no-op on any record that already existed: the digest was the same, the insert was ignored, and the caller was told duplicate while the hold it asked for was never placed.
Evidence points at the record this conclusion came from: a dispute id, a case id, a decision id. Required, because a label with no evidence cannot be defended when the adverse action it fed is challenged.
Kind is what the subject is: account, agent, merchant, payout, person, session or transaction. Closed, because a typo in an open field would shard a tenant's labels into a partition nothing reads and nothing would say so.
Seen is when this assertion became KNOWABLE, RFC 3339. It is required and it is not At: a chargeback lands 30 to 120 days after the transaction it judges, and a training set joined on At alone knows the future. Everything this plane does to prevent leakage is computed from Seen.
Source is who asserted: chargeoff, dispute, case, refund, review or sample. It is the primary term of the precedence rule, so it is closed — an unknown source has no rank and a conflict with it could not be resolved.
