Open finance skill
Which customer payment notices match the payments and invoices?
A remittance notice tells you which invoices a customer intends to pay. Check exact references, payer, date and amount first. Similarity can suggest a match; partial or uncertain allocations still need review.
From finding to decision
A payment notice, or remittance, explains which invoices a customer intends to pay. Fees, deductions, credits and combined deposits each need supporting records. Similar amounts suggest a match but cannot prove which invoices were paid.
The intended receipt and amounts assigned to invoices are identified. Unexplained differences remain open.
The person responsible for customer receivables accepts the allocation before any payment application is changed.
Level diagnostic method reviewed . Apply it to the selected records and accounting policy; the teaching example does not resolve a live account.
Guided synthetic example
A remittance email lists two invoices, but the bank deposit is slightly lower than their combined value.
An illustrative allocation is 15% collecting records, 20% applying checks, 10% flagging results, 25% investigating reasons, 20% finance review and 10% choosing an action. These percentages were not measured across engagements. Actual effort varies with data quality, complexity and the issue found.
| Evidence | Reference | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| Remittance | INV-410 + INV-414 | $18,750 |
| Bank deposit | DEP-81 | $18,625 |
| Difference | Unknown | $125 |
Match native invoice references first, then compare payer, date, exact-cent amount, and allocation completeness. Fuzzy similarity may nominate a candidate but cannot approve an allocation.
Needs review
The remittance and deposit differ by $125, so the allocation remains an unresolved non-footing exception. Neither invoice is approved for application.
At Level, we record the review logic, known explanations, and questions our finance professionals use in this situation. AI applies that documented human judgment to organize the most plausible reasons, without pretending it knows which reason is true.
Possible reasons to investigate
The difference might be a fee, short payment, credit, withholding, or an unrelated deposit issue.
In a Level engagement, a Level finance professional validates the source evidence, challenges the AI-assisted analysis, and decides which explanation is supported.
Confirm the reason and authorized allocation before applying the payment to either invoice.
Each skill uses an independent synthetic scenario. Shared month labels do not mean the examples describe one company or a single financial period.
Accounting review examples
These are additional review scenarios to discuss with your accountant or automation team. They describe what to check and when a person needs to investigate. They are illustrative, not software tests you can run here or proof of how a particular vendor works.
Test: Use the payment reference, payer, date and amount to support the allocation.
Expected: Approve the allocation only when the evidence identifies the intended invoice or invoices.
Pause and investigate when: References conflict or the same payment would be counted twice.
Test: Use name similarity to suggest possible matches and show the other evidence alongside each suggestion.
Expected: A similar name suggests a possible match; it does not prove one.
Pause and investigate when: Stable record IDs are missing or two matches are plausible.
Test: Compare cash applied to invoices plus cash not yet applied with the amount the customer paid before processor fees. Track credits and previously held deposits separately. Use settlement records to explain fees, deductions or several payments combined in the bank deposit.
Expected: The customer payment allocations and any bank-settlement differences are supported separately before an accountant approves the application.
Pause and investigate when: A payment allocation, unapplied cash amount or settlement difference has no supporting record.
Test: Check whether two different groups of invoices could explain the same payment amount.
Expected: Leave the payment unapplied until the payer's details establish the right group.
Pause and investigate when: Two groups fit or the search stopped before checking all relevant candidates.
Test: Compare the invoice amounts and cash received to the cent.
Expected: Explain a difference before applying it; a documented fee or adjustment may need a separate entry.
Pause and investigate when: The difference, fee or withholding has no supporting record.
Test: Check whether the same source payment has already been allocated, including when one payment is split across invoices.
Expected: A payment may be split, but the allocated amounts must not reuse the same portion of cash.
Pause and investigate when: An amount already allocated would be allocated again.
Use this system
The JSON download is a sample record file to inspect with an AI assistant or developer. It is not a file to upload into your accounting software.
Website example JSON and registry: CC BY 4.0 (attribution required). Downloadable toolkit ZIP: MIT. Each version identifies its own frozen examples.
Developer preview: AI-assistant helper (MCP)
This tool call returns fixed, invented sample records only. It does not connect to your books. Read the setup instructions.
run_synthetic_example {"slug":"remittance-matching-review"}This check organizes evidence and surfaces exceptions. A person with finance domain expertise still needs to interpret the result, validate the source records, and discuss the operating decision.
Open source does not mean open client data. We publish reusable finance tools, checks, templates, and playbooks. Client records, workpapers, credentials, communications, and private configurations remain confidential.
Use it yourself, or bring us the messy part
Tell us where the records stop making sense. We will reply with the first check to run, the records it needs, and the decision that still needs human finance judgment.
Install the free skills yourself