Actually I think I may have figured it out. I thought the Rule was pulling in the account schema attribute named “id” to compare with the “members” entitlement attribute. It is actually using whatever account schema attribute is marked as the “account id” which I previously had as a different unique attribute.
Changing the account schema’s official “Account Id” attribute to the id attribute that appears in the members array should fix this hopefully. Running an aggregation now.
Update: looks like this worked! Also worth noting that changing the Rule itself to use the id attribute rather than dynamically pulling the attribute labeled as the accountId should also work to fix this if you don’t want your accountId to be the ids on the members attribute.