CONTACT DATA · VALIDATION GUIDE

Home address validation API

Separate formatting suggestions from reference checks. Preserve unit numbers, explain partial matches, and let people review meaningful changes.

Better address data. Fewer wrong turns.

structurepass
postal_referencenot_checked
residencenot_checked

ILLUSTRATIVE SIGNALS · NOT A LIVE RESULT

WHAT TO MAKE EXPLICIT

Design around the evidence.

A result becomes useful when its method, limits, and next action are visible together.

01 / SIGNAL DESIGN

Structured components

Country-aware input and preserved units. Make the method and any unresolved context visible to the consumer.

02 / SIGNAL DESIGN

Normalization

Visible, reviewable formatting suggestions. Make the method and any unresolved context visible to the consumer.

03 / SIGNAL DESIGN

Reference findings

A named source and explicit coverage. Make the method and any unresolved context visible to the consumer.

What this does not establish

Address normalization is not proof of residence. A reference match does not, by itself, establish that a particular person lives there.

Reference: USPS Delivery Point Validation overview. Reference links explain the underlying distinction; they do not imply a partnership or an enabled source connection.

A CONTRACT YOU CAN DISCUSS

Read the example.
Review the assumptions.

Switch between the fictional request and response. The example records structure separately and leaves real-world verification unperformed.

Proposed route: POST /v1/validate/address. This is a design example, not an available network endpoint.

address.response.json
{
  "demo": true,
  "request_id": "sample_address_001",
  "status": "needs_review",
  "checks": {
    "structure": "pass",
    "postal_reference": "not_checked",
    "residence": "not_checked"
  },
  "reasons": [
    {
      "code": "example_only",
      "message": "Fictional fixture; no real-world validation performed."
    }
  ],
  "next_action": "review_requirements"
}
LOCAL EXAMPLE · NO NETWORK REQUESTJSON / UTF-8

Home address: fictional response example. These predefined signals illustrate a proposed contract, not a check of real data. View service scope.

PLAN THE NEXT STEP

Keep the workflow human.

Ask for correction.

Point to the missing context or affected field. Preserve the person’s intended value until a meaningful change is reviewed.

Make review explicit.

Separate incomplete evidence from negative findings. Assign ownership and provide a real path for resolving uncertainty.

Prepare for unavailability.

A dependency problem needs an operational route. Do not ask users to keep editing information that was never checked.

Explore another data family.

YOUR NEXT INTEGRATION

Make your next check
more meaningful.

Start with the right question. Build toward a clearer answer.