Table of Contents
If you’re building an AI-driven reporting or decisioning platform, you’ve probably hit the same ceiling: your models and workflows are only as good as the signals you can reliably attach to a minimal input.
Most real-world customer flows start with thin identifiers:
username / profile URL
Identity enrichment turns those minimal inputs into structured context your platform can use for:
onboarding decisioning
fraud/risk review routing
trust & safety investigations
compliance screening workflows (where enabled)
IRBIS is designed as an identity enrichment engine delivered via:
a web portal for interactive investigation + reporting, and
a developer API for automation and product integration.
What “enrichment” should mean for an AI-reporting platform
Good enrichment is not “a single answer”. It’s a repeatable way to attach context to an identifier so your system can produce better outcomes (faster approvals, fewer false positives, stronger cases for review).
A practical enrichment layer should give you:
Structured output (JSON-ready for pipelines, scoring, and report generation)
Explainability hooks (why did the system flag/route something?)
Consistency under load (automation-ready, not just “analyst tooling”)
Safe claims (no “guaranteed coverage”; results vary)
That’s exactly why many platforms standardize enrichment behind an internal “Enrichment Service” and treat providers as pluggable sources.
The core lookups that drive most platforms
1) Phone lookup (often the highest leverage)
Phone is a common “spine identifier” for onboarding, MFA, support, and payouts.
A phone enrichment flow typically aims to answer:
does it connect to additional identity signals (names/aliases/linked identifiers where available)?
does it show public footprint hints consistent with the user story?
are there exposure/breach indicators available?
IRBIS supports phone-based enrichment.
2) Email lookup and validation (useful for risk routing)
Email is universal but cheap to create at scale—so context matters.
Common goals:
validation signals (when enabled)
linked signals and footprint hints
IRBIS supports email-based enrichment.
3) Name search (important for compliance and investigations)
Names introduce ambiguity (duplicates, transliterations, partial matches). So name search is best used for:
compliance/investigation workflows
manual review support
“join” operations when you only have weak identifiers
IRBIS supports name-based enrichment / “Name WebScan”.
4) Username / social identifiers (platform risk and abuse)
For trust & safety and repeated-abuser detection, usernames and profile URLs can be strong pivots.
IRBIS supports username/social ID starting points.
Note: IRBIS is an enrichment engine. It does not monitor transaction history.
A reference architecture that works (and scales)
If you want IRBIS (or any provider) to strengthen your platform—not just add noise—treat enrichment as an internal product component.
Recommended pattern: “Enrichment Service” in your stack
Your platform → Enrichment Service → Provider API(s) → Normalized signals → Scoring + report generator
Key design choices:
Normalization layer: map provider output into your internal schema (signals, confidence tags, provenance)
Caching rules: cache per identifier + TTL to control cost and latency
Async option: queue long-running lookups; don’t block user flows unnecessarily
Fallback policy: if a lookup returns limited data, route to “review” instead of forcing a binary decision
Usage controls: rate limit + quota/credit monitoring + per-event budgets (signup vs payout vs escalation)
This is the pattern used by serious “reporting platforms” because it keeps your product stable even when providers vary by region, identifier quality, or plan.
Where enrichment creates immediate product advantage
Here are the integration points that most reliably improve KPIs:
Onboarding
reduce manual reviews by routing “clean + consistent signals” to auto-approve
push ambiguous cases into step-up verification or review
First payment / payout / withdrawal
attach risk/trust context right before money movement
prioritize reviewer time on the highest-risk cases
Trust & Safety events
connect repeated abusers across identifiers where signals exist
produce faster “case narratives” for analyst teams
Compliance workflows (where enabled)
support KYC and watchlists/PEP screening endpoints
maintain audit-friendly outputs for case files
How to evaluate an enrichment provider (the decision-maker checklist)
When you’re choosing a provider for an AI-driven platform, the important questions are rarely “do you have feature X?” Instead, ask:
Can we automate it reliably? (API-first, stable outputs, predictable error handling)
Can we explain decisions? (structured signals + provenance)
How does cost scale? (credit model, per-lookup variability, caching strategy)
What happens with partial data? (graceful degradation, not silent failures)
Is usage compliant with our policies? (data handling expectations, audit trails)
Does it support both workflows? portal for investigation + API for production automation
IRBIS is built specifically around the “portal + API” model so teams can validate signals manually and then productions them.
A practical “start small” rollout plan
If your goal is to ship a competitive enrichment capability quickly:
Pick one workflow (e.g., payout risk routing)
Pick one identifier (start with phone or email)
Define outcomes (approve / step-up / review / restrict)
Integrate via API behind your Enrichment Service
Measure impact (review time, fraud loss, false positives, approval rate)
Expand to name/username modules as needed
This approach avoids boiling the ocean and gets you to measurable ROI fast.
Next step (non-salesy, practical)
If you want to validate fit before building anything heavy:
test a small set of identifiers in the IRBIS portal to see the shape of outputs, then
move to the IRBIS API for automation once you’ve defined your normalization + routing rules.
