Subscriber attributes must agree with the message bodies supplied
The requirementstatement
A campaign must not declare a subscriber attribute that its supplied opt-in, STOP and HELP message bodies contradict.
- Severityseverity
- BlockingBLOCKINGBreaking this rule gets the submission rejected. There is no partial credit.
- When it bitesphase
- Gates approvalapprovalGet this wrong and the brand or campaign is refused at registration.
- What is checkedobject
- campaign attributes vs optin/optout/help message bodies
- Where it liveslayer
- Consent flowCONSENT_FLOW
- How Ekas settles itdetectability
- DeterministicDETERMINISTIC
- Settled in code from the values you submitted. No model involved, no judgement call, same answer every time.
- What the fix involvesfailureClass
- Fix the fieldRETRY_FIELD
- A better value in the form fixes it. Ekas can rewrite it and re-check.
- Who requires itauthorities
- AWSTwilio
- When it appliesapplicabilityText
- Applies to every 10DLC registration.
Why this rule existsrationale
The attributes and the reply bodies are two accounts of the same programme, and a reviewer reads them together: declaring that you honour opt-outs while supplying no STOP reply says the declaration was ticked rather than meant. The contradiction usually comes from an integration that sets the flags from a template and leaves the bodies to a human who never filled them in, so the submitter believes both halves are done.
How to fix itremediation
Write the reply body for every attribute you declared true, and turn the attribute on for every body you supplied. Done when each of the three pairs agrees: opt-out declared and a STOP confirmation written, HELP declared and a HELP reply written.
A compliant exampleexample
subscriberOptout: true · optout_message: "Acme Coffee Rewards: you are unsubscribed and will receive no further messages. Reply HELP for help."
Common mistakespitfalls
- Supplying a STOP or HELP reply while leaving the matching attribute false is the same mismatch in the other direction, and providers reject it just as readily.
Provider rejection codescodes
The code you get back when this rule is what failed, and whether that provider lets you resubmit.
| Provider | Code | Resubmit |
|---|---|---|
| Twiliogen2 | 30887 | Yes |
Notesnotes
Judges only the pairs where both facts are known: an attribute that has not been declared yet leaves this UNCLEAR rather than failing, because the missing declaration is already CON-010's finding and reporting it twice tells the user nothing new. The opt-in confirmation body is deliberately not required by the true-attribute direction — only keyword programmes must have one, which is CMP-096.
Rules you will hit next
Other consent flow rules at the same severity. A registration is judged as a whole, not rule by rule.
CON-008The live CTA and the declared message flow must say the same thingBlockingBLOCKINGCON-010The three subscriber-management attributes must be declared trueBlockingBLOCKINGCON-023Evidence URLs must resolve without a loginBlockingBLOCKINGCON-024The opt-in URL must serve a certificate that verifiesBlockingBLOCKINGCON-027The opt-in URL must land on a page that carries the opt-inBlockingBLOCKINGCON-034The business name on the artifact must match the registered brandBlockingBLOCKING
CON-013 is one of 101 consent flow rules in the 915-rule 10DLC registry. Free to cite under CC BY 4.0.