Instabridge, cross chain swap under an AML ceiling

Problem

Moving value between two independent ledgers is not a layout exercise: the user hands over funds and waits through a settlement process they cannot observe. Ethereum and Radix have different finality behaviour and no shared source of truth. On top sits an AML ceiling; scoped as a back-end rule, a breach is an error message arriving after the user has already committed to an amount.

Approach

Moved the AML position onto the dashboard as a permanent object rather than a rule that fires on submission: current tier, refresh date, ceiling, how much is consumed, how much remains, and a direct path to raise it, all next to the balances it governs. Both chain balances are given equal weight. The swap opens over the dashboard rather than a separate page, and "In Flight" exists as a first-class transaction status rather than the interface going quiet during settlement.

Outcome

A limit the user can see before choosing an amount is a planning input; a limit discovered at submission is a failure state. The transferable lesson: take a constraint the system already knows about the user, and put it where the decision gets made rather than behind the button that fails.