Validation and data quality: consistency checks, EBA rules, GLEIF LEI check

Outcome: you understand the app’s three levels of checks, run the EBA rule validation, read findings and statuses correctly and fix them; you also check LEIs online against the GLEIF register.

Overview: three levels of checks

Layer	When	What is checked	Effect
1. Consistency checks on save	Automatically on every save in the editor and for every imported row.	Keys present and unique, references exist, data types, valid codes, field lengths, only one record in B_01.01.	Blocks the save; red message in the editor or row error in the import result.
2. EBA rule validation (validation center)	On clicking Run validation; the counters in the cockpit are recalculated every time the cockpit is opened.	15 rules V-001 to V-015 across the whole register: mandatory fields, LEI check digits, ISO codes, code lists, orphaned references, business plausibility (table below).	Technically blocks nothing – the export stays possible but warns. Errors must be fixed before submission.
3. GLEIF LEI check	Manually per LEI field via the GLEIF button in the editor.	First format and check digits (ISO 17442), then an online lookup in the GLEIF register: does the LEI exist, what is the legal name, is the registration active?	Informational only: the result is not stored, blocks nothing and is not part of “Run validation”.

Understanding statuses and badges

Where	Display	Meaning
Cockpit → Validation	No findings / n errors n warnings	Current state of the rule check (calculated when the cockpit opens). The large number is the number of errors.
Validation center → Errors	blocks submission / none	“blocks submission” means: fix before reporting. Technically the export is not prevented.
Validation center → Warnings	please review / none	Plausibility hints that should be reviewed but do not have to be changed.
Findings table → Severity	Error / Warning	Errors always precede warnings; within one severity findings are sorted by template code.
Validation center without findings	All checks passed	All 15 rules without error or warning. App hint: “The register can be exported as an xBRL-CSV package under "Import & export".”
Import & export / Cockpit → export history	no errors / n errors	Validation state at the time the package was generated (warnings are not counted here).
Cockpit → Completeness per template	empty / in progress / complete	Share of filled mandatory fields per template – the same basis as rule V-001.

Consistency checks on save

These checks run on every save in the editor (red message at the top of the editor, the record is not saved) and for every row of an Excel import (row error in the import result). The placeholders ‹…› stand for the concrete field names and values.

Situation	Message (as displayed)	What to do
Key field empty (e.g. contract reference, identification code, LEI in B_01.01)	`Missing required value: "‹Field›" (key field of ‹Template›)`	Fill in the key field.
A record with the same key already exists	`A record with this key already exists in ‹Template›: {…}`	Edit the existing record instead of creating a new one, or choose a different key.
Reference to a non-existent record (in practice only via import)	`Reference not found: "‹Field›" = "‹value›" does not exist in ‹Template› (B_xx.xx). Please create the referenced record first.`	Create the referenced record first or correct the value.
Second record in Entity maintaining the register (`B_01.01`)	`Entity maintaining the register (B_01.01) may only contain a single record. Please edit the existing entry.`	Edit the existing entry.
Date not in the format YYYY-MM-DD (e.g. via import)	`Invalid date "‹value›" for "‹Field›" (format YYYY-MM-DD)`	Enter the date as YYYY-MM-DD.
Not a whole number (notice period, RTO/RPO, rank)	`"‹Field›" must be a whole number`	Enter digits only.
Not a number (costs, total assets)	`"‹Field›" must be a number`	Enter a number with a dot as decimal separator.
Text too long (key/reference fields 100 characters, term 200)	`"‹Field›" is too long (max. ‹N› characters)`	Shorten it.
Invalid code (in practice only via import)	`Invalid value "‹value›" for field "‹Field›" (‹table.field›)`	Use a code from the code list (The 15 EBA templates at a glance).
Changing a key value that is referenced	`Key "‹technical name›" cannot be changed: the value "‹value›" is still referenced in ‹Template› (B_xx.xx).`	Remove the references first or create a new record.
Deleting a referenced record	`Delete blocked: "‹value›" is still referenced in ‹Template› (B_xx.xx). Please remove the dependent records first.`	Delete dependent records first (reverse entry order).
Record was deleted in the meantime	`Record #‹id› not found in ‹Template›`	Reload the list (click the template again).

Run the EBA rule validation

Click Validation center (area Reporting). Before the first run it reads: “No check has been run yet. "Run validation" checks the entire register against the built-in EBA rules (incl. LEI check digits and referential integrity).”
Click Run validation at the top right. During the check the button reads “Checking…”.
Expected result: two tiles Errors and Warnings with count and badge, plus a table of all findings with the columns Severity, Rule, Template (code, with column where applicable, e.g. B_05.01 · c0050), Record (key values of the record) and Message.
Per finding: Go to record opens the list of the affected template (not the individual record) – search there for the value from the Record column and edit the record. Jira issue creates a Jira issue (see Jira workflow: annual-report epic, finding issues and the “RoI Record” issue panel).
After corrections click Run validation again – the table is a snapshot and does not refresh by itself.
Done when “All checks passed” appears. Then Generate and download the xBRL-CSV package.

Validation center before the first run — Figure 1: The validation center before the first run.

Validation center with 3 errors and 1 warning in the findings table — Figure 2: Result with the demo data: 3 errors (V-007, V-010, V-001) and 1 warning (V-011); per finding the actions “Go to record” and “Jira issue”.

Figure 3: After fixing all findings: “All checks passed”.

The 15 rules

Rule	Severity	Template(s)	What is checked	Message	Fix
`V-001`	Error	all	Mandatory fields per ITS (marked * in the editor) are filled.	`Mandatory field "‹Field›" is empty`	Open the record, fill in the field.
`V-002`	Error	all LEI fields	LEI has 20 characters and valid check digits (ISO 17442).	`"‹value›" is not a valid LEI (format/check digits)`	Correct the LEI; check it with the GLEIF button.
`V-003`	Error	all country/currency fields	Country code = 2 upper-case letters (ISO 3166-1 alpha-2), currency = 3 upper-case letters (ISO 4217).	`"‹value›" is not a valid country code …` / `… currency code (ISO 4217)`	Enter e.g. `DE`, `EUR`.
`V-004`	Error	all dropdown fields	Value is a valid code of the code list (occurs in practice only after imports).	`"‹value›" is not a valid code for "‹Field›"`	Open the record, pick a value from the list.
`V-005`	Error	all references	Every reference points to an existing record (no orphaned reference).	`Orphaned reference: "‹value›" does not exist in ‹table›`	Create the referenced record or correct the reference.
`V-006`	Error	`B_01.01`	Exactly one entity maintaining the register is recorded.	`The entity maintaining the register (B_01.01) has not been entered yet`	Create B_01.01.
`V-007`	Error	`B_02.02` ↔ `B_06.01`, `B_07.01`	If a contract detail supports a critical/important function (checkbox Supports a critical or important function in B_02.02 or the function in B_06.01 classified as “Critical or important”), an assessment for the same contract reference and provider must exist in B_07.01.	`Contract "‹ref›" supports a critical/important function — assessment in B_07.01 for provider "‹id›" is missing`	Create a record in B_07.01 with this contract reference and provider.
`V-008`	Error	`B_06.01`	Functions classified as “Critical or important” have a Date of last assessment.	`Function "‹name›" is classified as critical/important — date of last assessment is missing`	Enter the date.
`V-009`	Error	`B_02.02`	End date does not precede the start date.	`End date (‹date›) precedes the start date (‹date›)`	Correct the dates.
`V-010`	Error	`B_02.02`	If Is data stored? = yes, Location of data storage (country) is filled.	`Contract "‹ref›": data is stored, but the storage location (country) is missing`	Enter the storage location (country code).
`V-011`	Warning	`B_05.01`	Every provider is used in at least one contract detail (B_02.02), supply chain (B_05.02), as signing provider (B_03.02) or as parent of another provider.	`Provider "‹name›" is not referenced by any contract or supply chain`	Add a contract or delete the provider.
`V-012`	Warning	`B_05.02` ↔ `B_02.02`	The rank-1 provider of a supply chain is also a direct contract provider in B_02.02 for that contract reference.	`Supply chain for "‹ref›": rank-1 provider "‹id›" is not the direct contract provider`	Check rank or provider.
`V-013`	Error	`B_05.02`	Rank is at least 1.	`Invalid rank ‹n› — ranks start at 1 (direct provider)`	Correct the rank.
`V-014`	Error	`B_02.01`	A “Subsequent arrangement under a master arrangement” has a Reference of the master arrangement, and it refers to a “Master (overarching) arrangement”.	`Subsequent arrangement "‹ref›" without a reference to its master arrangement` / `"‹ref›" is not a master arrangement (type ≠ 2)`	Add the reference or correct the type of arrangement.
`V-015`	Warning	all amount fields	Amounts (costs, total assets) are not negative.	`"‹Field›" is negative (‹value›)`	Check the value.

Check an LEI online against GLEIF

Open the record in the editor (Edit or + New).
Enter the LEI in the LEI field (20 characters; lower case is converted automatically) and click the GLEIF button to the right of the field.
Expected result: after a moment a badge with the result appears below the field (table below). Green = the LEI exists and its registration is active; yellow = anything else.
The result is not stored. Save the record as usual with Save – a yellow result does not prevent saving either.

Figure 4: Result for a demo LEI: formally valid but not registered with GLEIF.

Figure 5: Result for an LEI that is active at GLEIF (example with a public LEI): green badge with the registered name.

Results

Badge	Meaning	What to do
LEI aktiv und gültig · ‹Name›	The LEI is registered with GLEIF and its registration has status ISSUED (active). The legal name held at GLEIF is shown.	Compare the name with your record.
Formal ungültiger LEI (Prüfziffern)	Format or check digits are wrong – no online lookup was performed.	Correct the typo (20 characters, last two digits = check digits).
LEI ist bei GLEIF nicht registriert	Formally correct but unknown to GLEIF (the case for all demo LEIs).	Ask the provider for the correct LEI.
LEI-Registrierungsstatus: ‹STATUS› · ‹Name›	The LEI exists but its registration is not active (e.g. LAPSED = not renewed).	Clarify with the provider; the app blocks nothing.
GLEIF-API antwortete mit Status ‹n›	The GLEIF register answered with an error (e.g. 429 too many requests, 5xx outage).	Try again later.

The result texts are in German in both UI languages (known limitation of the app).
The check is informational only: it is not part of Run validation (which checks only format/check digits, rule V-002), and there is no bulk check of all LEIs.
Only the 20-character LEI is sent to api.gleif.org; the site administrator must have consented to this connection at installation.
There is no EUID check (business register/BRIS).

Rendered from the app’s own interface with the built-in demo data (“Nordpay”, a fictitious payment institution); the Jira frame around it is not shown.

Documentation baseline: app version 2.0.0 · 2026-08-25