Bindings choose the account; money never falls back

Context

Financial routing must preserve the intended processor across refusals.

Decision

Select the provider account through scoped bindings, checking the most specific scope first. Sensitive capabilities and refusal policies stop at an ineligible choice; a provider circuit does not redirect a call to another account.

Alternatives Considered

Require an explicitly selected account for every application call. Applications would duplicate routing configuration; explicit account selection is still needed for operations tied to an earlier provider action.

Choose another provider when the selected account refuses. Financial work could reach an account or processor the caller did not intend.

Consequences

A sensitive operation returns the refusal instead of switching processors.

Explanation exposes binding selection and eligibility rather than making provider work.

Changes to account or installation usability reassess dependent bindings.