docs(crypto-to-fiat): expand comprehensive guide with sandbox access, compliance flows, and implementation details#59
Open
docs(crypto-to-fiat): expand comprehensive guide with sandbox access, compliance flows, and implementation details#59
Conversation
Update `api-features/crypto-to-fiat-payments.mdx` to remove hardcoded `docs.request.network` URLs and use Mintlify internal routes instead. - replaced EasyInvoice reference with `/request-network-api/easyinvoice-api-demo-app` - replaced crosschain reference with `/api-features/crosschain-payments` - ensures the page stays self-contained for cutover from legacy docs
This was referenced Mar 2, 2026
Open
Open
Member
Author
This was referenced Mar 2, 2026
Open
aimensahnoun
changed the title
api-features/crypto-to-fiat-payments.mdx to remove hardcoded docs.request.network URLs and use Mintlify internal routes instead. - replaced EasyInvoice reference with `/requ
Greptile SummaryThis PR completely rewrites the crypto-to-fiat payments documentation, replacing AI-generated placeholder content with comprehensive implementation guidance. The new content includes detailed onboarding flows, compliance requirements, endpoint references, and three sequence diagrams showing the complete integration process. Major improvements:
Issues found:
The documentation follows Mintlify component guidelines and technical writing best practices, providing clear step-by-step guidance for developers integrating crypto-to-fiat payments. Confidence Score: 4/5
Important Files Changed
Last reviewed commit: 46ae1bb |
![greptile-apps[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/867647?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
|
|
||
| <Warning> | ||
| **AI-Generated Content** – This page was generated with AI assistance and may contain inaccuracies. While likely close to accurate, please verify critical details with the [stable documentation](https://docs.request.network) or [contact support](https://github.com/orgs/RequestNetwork/discussions). | ||
| I**mportant: Other Payment Types Use Real Funds** |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
typo in formatting - "I**mportant:" should be "**Important:"
Suggested change
| I**mportant: Other Payment Types Use Real Funds** | |
| **Important: Other Payment Types Use Real Funds** |
| RequestAPI-->>Platform: webhook: compliance.updated (kycStatus: pending/approved/rejected/failed) | ||
| Platform->>Payer: Show iframe for agreement signature | ||
| Payer->>Platform: Completes signature | ||
| Platform->>RequestAPI: PATCH /payer/{payerId} (agreement_status: completed) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
inconsistent parameter naming - uses {payerId} but should be {clientUserId} per the "Understanding clientUserId" section
Suggested change
| Platform->>RequestAPI: PATCH /payer/{payerId} (agreement_status: completed) | |
| Platform->>RequestAPI: PATCH /payer/{clientUserId} (agreement_status: completed) |
|
|
||
| ### Relevant Endpoints | ||
|
|
||
| * `POST /payer`: Submit KYC application. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
missing version prefix - should be /v2/payer for consistency with line 136
Suggested change
| * `POST /payer`: Submit KYC application. | |
| * `POST /v2/payer`: Submit KYC application. |
| participant RequestTech | ||
|
|
||
| Payee->>Platform: Submit bank info via Bank Account Form | ||
| Platform->>RequestAPI: POST /payer/{payerId}/payment-details (bank info) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
inconsistent parameter naming - uses {payerId} but should be {clientUserId} per the "Understanding clientUserId" section
Suggested change
| Platform->>RequestAPI: POST /payer/{payerId}/payment-details (bank info) | |
| Platform->>RequestAPI: POST /payer/{clientUserId}/payment-details (bank info) |
Comment on lines
+225
to
+239
| ```mermaid | ||
| sequenceDiagram | ||
| participant Payer | ||
| participant Platform | ||
| participant RequestAPI | ||
| participant RequestTech | ||
| participant Blockchain | ||
|
|
||
| Platform->>RequestAPI: GET payment calldata for request/{requestId}/pay | ||
| Platform->>Payer: Prompt to sign and send transaction | ||
| Payer->>Blockchain: Send crypto to Request Tech | ||
| Blockchain-->>RequestTech: Payment received | ||
| RequestTech-->>RequestAPI: offramp_update (webhook) | ||
| RequestAPI-->>Platform: webhook: payment.processing/payment.failed (subStatus: initiated, ongoing_checks, sending_fiat, fiat_sent, failed, etc.) | ||
| RequestTech->>Payee Bank: Offramp and deposit fiat |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
missing participant declaration - "Payee Bank" is used on line 239 but not declared in the participant list
Suggested change
| ```mermaid | |
| sequenceDiagram | |
| participant Payer | |
| participant Platform | |
| participant RequestAPI | |
| participant RequestTech | |
| participant Blockchain | |
| Platform->>RequestAPI: GET payment calldata for request/{requestId}/pay | |
| Platform->>Payer: Prompt to sign and send transaction | |
| Payer->>Blockchain: Send crypto to Request Tech | |
| Blockchain-->>RequestTech: Payment received | |
| RequestTech-->>RequestAPI: offramp_update (webhook) | |
| RequestAPI-->>Platform: webhook: payment.processing/payment.failed (subStatus: initiated, ongoing_checks, sending_fiat, fiat_sent, failed, etc.) | |
| RequestTech->>Payee Bank: Offramp and deposit fiat | |
| sequenceDiagram | |
| participant Payer | |
| participant Platform | |
| participant RequestAPI | |
| participant RequestTech | |
| participant Blockchain | |
| participant Payee Bank | |
| Platform->>RequestAPI: GET payment calldata for request/{requestId}/pay | |
| Platform->>Payer: Prompt to sign and send transaction | |
| Payer->>Blockchain: Send crypto to Request Tech | |
| Blockchain-->>RequestTech: Payment received | |
| RequestTech-->>RequestAPI: offramp_update (webhook) | |
| RequestAPI-->>Platform: webhook: payment.processing/payment.failed (subStatus: initiated, ongoing_checks, sending_fiat, fiat_sent, failed, etc.) | |
| RequestTech->>Payee Bank: Offramp and deposit fiat |
This was referenced Mar 2, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
TL;DR
Completely rewrote the crypto-to-fiat payments documentation to provide comprehensive implementation guidance with detailed flows, endpoint references, and practical examples.
What changed?
clientUserIdconcept and explanation for user managementHow to test?
Why make this change?
The previous documentation was AI-generated placeholder content that lacked practical implementation details. This rewrite provides developers with actionable guidance, complete API references, and clear flow diagrams needed to successfully integrate crypto-to-fiat payments into their applications.