feat(reconciliation): match migrated bank history against imported SIE verifikat (#1598)
* feat(reconciliation): match migrated bank history against imported SIE verifikat A first-class Fortnox/SIE migrator path: after SIE import plus bank connect or bank CSV upload, historical bank rows are auto-matched (>= 0.9) or suggestion-matched (0.75-0.89, persisted for review) against the imported verifikat, with a guided review surface, instead of landing as anonymous "Att bokfora" rows. Phase 0: per-cash-account unattended sweep (fixes #1298 cross-account pooling); widen payment_match_log action CHECK with linked_to_existing_voucher (silently unlogged since March). Phase 1: potential_journal_entry_id/method/confidence on transactions with CHECK + invalidation triggers; persistSuggestions in runReconciliation; sweep after bank CSV import with SIE overlap (suppressing auto-categorization); sweep summaries stamped on bank_connections and bank_file_imports; POST /api/reconciliation/bank/confirm-suggestions with per-pair server-side revalidation (voucher consumption + bank-leg amount and direction). Phase 2: "Granska forslag" review tab on Transactions with chunked bulk confirm, per-row fallbacks, "Kor matchning igen" (all_accounts sweep mode, mutually exclusive with dry_run), attn line, pre-migration row marker. Phase 3: ImportResultStep dual CTA (bank connect + CSV), migrator variant of the account-picker #917 nudge, sweep outcome on the onboarding checklist bank step. Non-selection apply runs on /api/reconciliation/bank/run now floor at 0.9 and persist the review band instead of auto-committing fuzzy matches. Migrations already applied to staging under the same versions. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(reconciliation): resolve PR review findings in one pass Swedish accounting review (both previously-deferred holes closed): - runReconciliation's >= 0.9 auto-apply now writes 'matched' to payment_match_log (behandlingshistorik, BFNAR 2013:2 kap 8); the bus event alone lands in the 30-day event_log and is not an audit record. - The three match-route storno-conflict branches detach reconciliation links via unlinkReconciliation instead of storno-reversing the linked verifikat: a reconciliation link points at an independent verifikat that may evidence other affarshandelser, and a wholesale reversal is an over-broad rattelse (BFL 5 kap 5 §). - Historical gap quantified on prod (read-only, recorded in DECISIONS): 762 unlogged manual links across 52 companies since 2026-03-23. CodeRabbit: - confirm-suggestions route: maxDuration 300 for full 500-item batches. - AccountPickerDialog: migrator-nudge buttons set lookbackTouched so the async gap-fill probe cannot override an explicit choice. - enable-banking post-backfill sweep: persistSuggestions so the review band is not dropped. - bank-file execute: sie_sweep stamp errors are logged, not swallowed. - ImportResultStep: sandbox keeps the CSV CTA (file import works there). - payment_match_log CHECK swap: NOT VALID + VALIDATE, no table scan under ACCESS EXCLUSIVE. - logMatchEvent calls awaited (serverless can freeze unawaited work). - DECISIONS.md stale version reference annotated. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(reconciliation): defer reconciliation-link detach until the match commits Round-2 review findings: - CodeRabbit: the eager unlinkReconciliation call could orphan a transaction if the match flow failed after it. All three match routes now persist NOTHING up front: the final transaction update overwrites journal_entry_id and clears reconciliation_method in the same write, so any failure in between leaves the existing link intact. The release is logged as 'unmatched' after the commit. - Swedish review: the auto_suggested logMatchEvent in runReconciliation is now awaited like every other audit write. - DECISIONS entry split into compliance/CodeRabbit lines and updated to describe the deferred detach. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(reconciliation): literal reconciliation_method payloads for the phantom-column scanner The conditional spreads introduced with the deferred detach pushed the scanner's unresolvable-expression count past its ceiling (380 > 378). reconciliation_method: null is correct unconditionally on a confirmed invoice/supplier match (null is already the value on every row that was not reconciliation-linked), so the payloads become plain literals the guard can verify. No behavior change. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Mattsson
co-authored by
Claude Fable 5
Claude Fable 5
parent
07e89d9b52
commit
08440fed94
@@ -605,6 +605,59 @@ describe('runReconciliation', () => {
|
||||
expect(result.errors).toBe(0)
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
it('persists the below-threshold band as suggestions when persistSuggestions is set', async () => {
|
||||
const { supabase, enqueue } = createQueueMockSupabase()
|
||||
|
||||
// Fuzzy match: amount off by 1 öre on the exact date → 0.75 confidence,
|
||||
// below the 0.9 unattended floor.
|
||||
const tx = makeTransaction({ id: 'tx-1', amount: 1000.01, date: '2024-06-15', currency: 'SEK' })
|
||||
const glLine: UnlinkedGLLine = makeGLLine({
|
||||
line_id: 'line-1',
|
||||
journal_entry_id: 'je-1',
|
||||
debit_amount: 1000,
|
||||
entry_date: '2024-06-15',
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
enqueue({ data: [glLine] }) // RPC: GL lines
|
||||
enqueue({ data: [tx] }) // transactions
|
||||
enqueue({ data: [{ id: 'tx-1' }] }) // suggestion update .select('id')
|
||||
|
||||
const result = await runReconciliation(supabase as never, 'company-1', 'user-1', {
|
||||
confidenceThreshold: 0.9,
|
||||
persistSuggestions: true,
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
expect(result.applied).toBe(0)
|
||||
expect(result.skippedBelowThreshold).toBe(1)
|
||||
expect(result.suggested).toBe(1)
|
||||
expect(result.candidates).toBe(1)
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
it('does not count a suggestion whose optimistic-lock update matched zero rows', async () => {
|
||||
const { supabase, enqueue } = createQueueMockSupabase()
|
||||
|
||||
const tx = makeTransaction({ id: 'tx-1', amount: 1000.01, date: '2024-06-15', currency: 'SEK' })
|
||||
const glLine: UnlinkedGLLine = makeGLLine({
|
||||
line_id: 'line-1',
|
||||
journal_entry_id: 'je-1',
|
||||
debit_amount: 1000,
|
||||
entry_date: '2024-06-15',
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
enqueue({ data: [glLine] })
|
||||
enqueue({ data: [tx] })
|
||||
// A concurrent writer booked the row: .is('journal_entry_id', null) → 0 rows.
|
||||
enqueue({ data: [] })
|
||||
|
||||
const result = await runReconciliation(supabase as never, 'company-1', 'user-1', {
|
||||
confidenceThreshold: 0.9,
|
||||
persistSuggestions: true,
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
expect(result.suggested).toBe(0)
|
||||
expect(result.skippedBelowThreshold).toBe(1)
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
it('counts a conflicted apply (0 rows updated) as an error, not applied', async () => {
|
||||
const { supabase, enqueue } = createQueueMockSupabase()
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,280 @@
|
||||
/**
|
||||
* Tests for confirm/reject of persisted journal-entry match suggestions.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* The contract under test: every pair is revalidated server-side at confirm
|
||||
* time (row state, voucher consumption, and the voucher's bank-leg amount and
|
||||
* direction), stale pairs are skipped (never failing the batch), and a
|
||||
* verifikat cannot be consumed twice within one bulk confirm.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
import { describe, it, expect, vi, beforeEach } from 'vitest'
|
||||
|
||||
const { manualLinkMock } = vi.hoisted(() => ({ manualLinkMock: vi.fn() }))
|
||||
|
||||
vi.mock('../bank-reconciliation', async (importOriginal) => {
|
||||
const actual = await importOriginal<typeof import('../bank-reconciliation')>()
|
||||
return { ...actual, manualLink: manualLinkMock }
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
const { logMatchEventMock } = vi.hoisted(() => ({ logMatchEventMock: vi.fn() }))
|
||||
vi.mock('@/lib/invoices/match-log', () => ({
|
||||
logMatchEvent: (...args: unknown[]) => logMatchEventMock(...args),
|
||||
}))
|
||||
|
||||
import {
|
||||
confirmJournalEntrySuggestions,
|
||||
rejectJournalEntrySuggestions,
|
||||
} from '../suggestions'
|
||||
|
||||
/** Queue-based chainable supabase stub, same pattern as the reconciliation
|
||||
* suite: each awaited chain consumes the next queued result. */
|
||||
function createQueueMockSupabase() {
|
||||
const resultQueue: { data: unknown; error: unknown }[] = []
|
||||
const enqueue = (...results: { data?: unknown; error?: unknown }[]) => {
|
||||
for (const r of results) {
|
||||
resultQueue.push({ data: r.data ?? null, error: r.error ?? null })
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
const buildChain = (): unknown => {
|
||||
const handler: ProxyHandler<object> = {
|
||||
get(_target, prop) {
|
||||
if (prop === 'then') {
|
||||
const next = resultQueue.shift() ?? { data: null, error: null }
|
||||
return (resolve: (v: unknown) => void) => resolve(next)
|
||||
}
|
||||
return (..._args: unknown[]) => buildChain()
|
||||
},
|
||||
}
|
||||
return new Proxy({}, handler)
|
||||
}
|
||||
const supabase = {
|
||||
from: vi.fn().mockImplementation(() => buildChain()),
|
||||
rpc: vi.fn().mockImplementation(() => buildChain()),
|
||||
}
|
||||
return { supabase, enqueue }
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
const TX_1 = 'tx-1'
|
||||
const TX_2 = 'tx-2'
|
||||
const JE_1 = 'je-1'
|
||||
const CA_ID = 'ca-1'
|
||||
|
||||
function suggestionRow(overrides: Record<string, unknown> = {}) {
|
||||
return {
|
||||
id: TX_1,
|
||||
amount: -1000,
|
||||
currency: 'SEK',
|
||||
journal_entry_id: null,
|
||||
potential_journal_entry_id: JE_1,
|
||||
potential_match_method: 'auto_date_range',
|
||||
potential_match_confidence: '0.85',
|
||||
cash_account_id: CA_ID,
|
||||
...overrides,
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/** A voucher bank leg agreeing with suggestionRow's -1000 (credit = money out). */
|
||||
function matchingLegs() {
|
||||
return [{ debit_amount: 0, credit_amount: 1000, currency: null, amount_in_currency: null }]
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
describe('confirmJournalEntrySuggestions', () => {
|
||||
beforeEach(() => {
|
||||
vi.clearAllMocks()
|
||||
manualLinkMock.mockResolvedValue({ success: true })
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
it('confirms a valid suggestion via manualLink against the row\'s own settlement account', async () => {
|
||||
const { supabase, enqueue } = createQueueMockSupabase()
|
||||
enqueue({ data: suggestionRow() }) // fetch tx
|
||||
enqueue({ data: [] }) // consumers of JE_1: none
|
||||
enqueue({ data: { ledger_account: '1932' } }) // cash account resolve
|
||||
enqueue({ data: matchingLegs() }) // amount revalidation legs
|
||||
|
||||
const result = await confirmJournalEntrySuggestions(supabase as never, 'company-1', 'user-1', [
|
||||
TX_1,
|
||||
])
|
||||
|
||||
expect(result.confirmed).toEqual([TX_1])
|
||||
expect(result.skipped).toEqual([])
|
||||
expect(manualLinkMock).toHaveBeenCalledWith(supabase, 'company-1', TX_1, JE_1, 'user-1', '1932')
|
||||
expect(logMatchEventMock).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
|
||||
supabase,
|
||||
'user-1',
|
||||
TX_1,
|
||||
'linked_to_existing_voucher',
|
||||
expect.objectContaining({ matchMethod: 'auto_date_range', matchConfidence: 0.85 }),
|
||||
)
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
it('skips a transaction whose suggested verifikat is already consumed', async () => {
|
||||
const { supabase, enqueue } = createQueueMockSupabase()
|
||||
enqueue({ data: suggestionRow() })
|
||||
enqueue({ data: [{ id: 'other-tx' }] }) // someone already settles JE_1
|
||||
|
||||
const result = await confirmJournalEntrySuggestions(supabase as never, 'company-1', 'user-1', [
|
||||
TX_1,
|
||||
])
|
||||
|
||||
expect(result.confirmed).toEqual([])
|
||||
expect(result.skipped).toEqual([{ transactionId: TX_1, reason: 'voucher_consumed' }])
|
||||
expect(manualLinkMock).not.toHaveBeenCalled()
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
it('never fails the batch: second row suggesting the same verifikat is skipped after the first consumes it', async () => {
|
||||
const { supabase, enqueue } = createQueueMockSupabase()
|
||||
// Row 1: full happy path.
|
||||
enqueue({ data: suggestionRow() })
|
||||
enqueue({ data: [] })
|
||||
enqueue({ data: { ledger_account: '1930' } })
|
||||
enqueue({ data: matchingLegs() })
|
||||
// Row 2 (fetched AFTER row 1 linked): the sibling-clear trigger has wiped
|
||||
// its suggestion, so it reads as no_suggestion.
|
||||
enqueue({ data: suggestionRow({ id: TX_2, potential_journal_entry_id: null, potential_match_method: null, potential_match_confidence: null }) })
|
||||
|
||||
const result = await confirmJournalEntrySuggestions(supabase as never, 'company-1', 'user-1', [
|
||||
TX_1,
|
||||
TX_2,
|
||||
])
|
||||
|
||||
expect(result.confirmed).toEqual([TX_1])
|
||||
expect(result.skipped).toEqual([{ transactionId: TX_2, reason: 'no_suggestion' }])
|
||||
expect(manualLinkMock).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(1)
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
it('reports manualLink refusals as link_failed with the service message', async () => {
|
||||
const { supabase, enqueue } = createQueueMockSupabase()
|
||||
enqueue({ data: suggestionRow() })
|
||||
enqueue({ data: [] })
|
||||
enqueue({ data: { ledger_account: '1930' } })
|
||||
enqueue({ data: matchingLegs() })
|
||||
manualLinkMock.mockResolvedValue({ success: false, error: 'Verifikationen är inte bokförd ännu.' })
|
||||
|
||||
const result = await confirmJournalEntrySuggestions(supabase as never, 'company-1', 'user-1', [
|
||||
TX_1,
|
||||
])
|
||||
|
||||
expect(result.confirmed).toEqual([])
|
||||
expect(result.skipped).toEqual([
|
||||
{ transactionId: TX_1, reason: 'link_failed', message: 'Verifikationen är inte bokförd ännu.' },
|
||||
])
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
it('skips not-found and already-linked rows', async () => {
|
||||
const { supabase, enqueue } = createQueueMockSupabase()
|
||||
enqueue({ data: null }) // TX_1 not found
|
||||
enqueue({ data: suggestionRow({ id: TX_2, journal_entry_id: 'je-existing' }) })
|
||||
|
||||
const result = await confirmJournalEntrySuggestions(supabase as never, 'company-1', 'user-1', [
|
||||
TX_1,
|
||||
TX_2,
|
||||
])
|
||||
|
||||
expect(result.confirmed).toEqual([])
|
||||
expect(result.skipped).toEqual([
|
||||
{ transactionId: TX_1, reason: 'not_found' },
|
||||
{ transactionId: TX_2, reason: 'already_linked' },
|
||||
])
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
it('resolves NULL-cash_account_id rows via the PRIMARY cash account, falling back to 1930', async () => {
|
||||
const { supabase, enqueue } = createQueueMockSupabase()
|
||||
enqueue({ data: suggestionRow({ cash_account_id: null }) })
|
||||
enqueue({ data: [] })
|
||||
// Primary lookup: the company's primary account is 1920, so the unassigned
|
||||
// row must validate against 1920 (the sweep created the suggestion under
|
||||
// the primary's scope), never a hard-coded 1930.
|
||||
enqueue({ data: { ledger_account: '1920' } })
|
||||
enqueue({ data: matchingLegs() })
|
||||
|
||||
await confirmJournalEntrySuggestions(supabase as never, 'company-1', 'user-1', [TX_1])
|
||||
|
||||
expect(manualLinkMock).toHaveBeenCalledWith(supabase, 'company-1', TX_1, JE_1, 'user-1', '1920')
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
it('falls back to 1930 when no primary cash account exists', async () => {
|
||||
const { supabase, enqueue } = createQueueMockSupabase()
|
||||
enqueue({ data: suggestionRow({ cash_account_id: null }) })
|
||||
enqueue({ data: [] })
|
||||
enqueue({ data: null }) // no primary row
|
||||
enqueue({ data: matchingLegs() })
|
||||
|
||||
await confirmJournalEntrySuggestions(supabase as never, 'company-1', 'user-1', [TX_1])
|
||||
|
||||
expect(manualLinkMock).toHaveBeenCalledWith(supabase, 'company-1', TX_1, JE_1, 'user-1', '1930')
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
it('skips with amount_mismatch when the voucher bank leg no longer agrees with the transaction', async () => {
|
||||
// Inline rattelse re-priced the voucher's bank leg from 1000 to 500 after
|
||||
// the suggestion was computed: status stays posted, so no invalidation
|
||||
// trigger fired. Confirm must refuse instead of asserting a false
|
||||
// correspondence (BFL 5 kap 7 §).
|
||||
const { supabase, enqueue } = createQueueMockSupabase()
|
||||
enqueue({ data: suggestionRow() })
|
||||
enqueue({ data: [] })
|
||||
enqueue({ data: { ledger_account: '1930' } })
|
||||
enqueue({ data: [{ debit_amount: 0, credit_amount: 500, currency: null, amount_in_currency: null }] })
|
||||
|
||||
const result = await confirmJournalEntrySuggestions(supabase as never, 'company-1', 'user-1', [
|
||||
TX_1,
|
||||
])
|
||||
|
||||
expect(result.confirmed).toEqual([])
|
||||
expect(result.skipped).toHaveLength(1)
|
||||
expect(result.skipped[0]).toMatchObject({ transactionId: TX_1, reason: 'amount_mismatch' })
|
||||
expect(manualLinkMock).not.toHaveBeenCalled()
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
it('skips with amount_mismatch when the direction flipped', async () => {
|
||||
const { supabase, enqueue } = createQueueMockSupabase()
|
||||
enqueue({ data: suggestionRow({ amount: 1000 }) }) // money IN
|
||||
enqueue({ data: [] })
|
||||
enqueue({ data: { ledger_account: '1930' } })
|
||||
enqueue({ data: matchingLegs() }) // credit leg = money OUT
|
||||
|
||||
const result = await confirmJournalEntrySuggestions(supabase as never, 'company-1', 'user-1', [
|
||||
TX_1,
|
||||
])
|
||||
|
||||
expect(result.skipped[0]).toMatchObject({ transactionId: TX_1, reason: 'amount_mismatch' })
|
||||
expect(manualLinkMock).not.toHaveBeenCalled()
|
||||
})
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
describe('rejectJournalEntrySuggestions', () => {
|
||||
beforeEach(() => {
|
||||
vi.clearAllMocks()
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
it('clears the suggestion and logs suggestion_cleared with the previous state', async () => {
|
||||
const { supabase, enqueue } = createQueueMockSupabase()
|
||||
enqueue({ data: suggestionRow() })
|
||||
enqueue({ data: null }) // clear update
|
||||
|
||||
const result = await rejectJournalEntrySuggestions(supabase as never, 'company-1', 'user-1', [
|
||||
TX_1,
|
||||
])
|
||||
|
||||
expect(result.rejected).toEqual([TX_1])
|
||||
expect(logMatchEventMock).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
|
||||
supabase,
|
||||
'user-1',
|
||||
TX_1,
|
||||
'suggestion_cleared',
|
||||
expect.objectContaining({
|
||||
previousState: expect.objectContaining({ potential_journal_entry_id: JE_1 }),
|
||||
}),
|
||||
)
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
it('skips rows without a suggestion', async () => {
|
||||
const { supabase, enqueue } = createQueueMockSupabase()
|
||||
enqueue({ data: suggestionRow({ potential_journal_entry_id: null }) })
|
||||
|
||||
const result = await rejectJournalEntrySuggestions(supabase as never, 'company-1', 'user-1', [
|
||||
TX_1,
|
||||
])
|
||||
|
||||
expect(result.rejected).toEqual([])
|
||||
expect(result.skipped).toEqual([{ transactionId: TX_1, reason: 'no_suggestion' }])
|
||||
})
|
||||
})
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,249 @@
|
||||
/**
|
||||
* Tests for the per-cash-account unattended reconciliation sweep (issue #1298).
|
||||
*
|
||||
* The sweep is the shared entry point for every unattended caller (EB cron,
|
||||
* manual EB sync, bank-file import). What matters here is the fan-out contract:
|
||||
* one scoped runReconciliation call per enabled cash account, the legacy
|
||||
* 1930/SEK fallback for companies with no cash_accounts rows, per-account
|
||||
* failure isolation, and honest aggregation.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
import { describe, it, expect, vi, beforeEach } from 'vitest'
|
||||
|
||||
const { runReconciliationMock } = vi.hoisted(() => ({
|
||||
runReconciliationMock: vi.fn(),
|
||||
}))
|
||||
|
||||
vi.mock('../bank-reconciliation', async (importOriginal) => {
|
||||
const actual = await importOriginal<typeof import('../bank-reconciliation')>()
|
||||
return {
|
||||
...actual,
|
||||
runReconciliation: runReconciliationMock,
|
||||
}
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
import { runUnattendedReconciliationSweep, toSweepSummary } from '../unattended-sweep'
|
||||
import { DEFAULT_UNATTENDED_CONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD } from '../bank-reconciliation'
|
||||
|
||||
function emptyRunResult(overrides: Partial<{
|
||||
applied: number
|
||||
errors: number
|
||||
skippedBelowThreshold: number
|
||||
suggested: number
|
||||
candidates: number
|
||||
matches: unknown[]
|
||||
}> = {}) {
|
||||
return {
|
||||
matches: overrides.matches ?? [],
|
||||
applied: overrides.applied ?? 0,
|
||||
errors: overrides.errors ?? 0,
|
||||
skippedBelowThreshold: overrides.skippedBelowThreshold ?? 0,
|
||||
suggested: overrides.suggested ?? 0,
|
||||
candidates: overrides.candidates ?? 0,
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/** Chainable stub for the cash_accounts lookup: every method returns the chain,
|
||||
* awaiting it resolves the configured result. */
|
||||
function makeSupabase(result: { data: unknown; error: unknown }) {
|
||||
const chain: Record<string, unknown> = {}
|
||||
const handler: ProxyHandler<object> = {
|
||||
get(_target, prop) {
|
||||
if (prop === 'then') {
|
||||
return (resolve: (v: unknown) => void) => resolve(result)
|
||||
}
|
||||
return () => new Proxy(chain, handler)
|
||||
},
|
||||
}
|
||||
return {
|
||||
from: vi.fn().mockImplementation(() => new Proxy(chain, handler)),
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
const CA_1930 = {
|
||||
id: '11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111',
|
||||
ledger_account: '1930',
|
||||
currency: 'SEK',
|
||||
is_primary: true,
|
||||
}
|
||||
const CA_1931 = {
|
||||
id: '22222222-2222-4222-8222-222222222222',
|
||||
ledger_account: '1931',
|
||||
currency: 'SEK',
|
||||
is_primary: false,
|
||||
}
|
||||
const CA_1932_EUR = {
|
||||
id: '33333333-3333-4333-8333-333333333333',
|
||||
ledger_account: '1932',
|
||||
currency: 'EUR',
|
||||
is_primary: false,
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
describe('runUnattendedReconciliationSweep', () => {
|
||||
beforeEach(() => {
|
||||
vi.clearAllMocks()
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
it('runs once per enabled cash account with that account\'s scope', async () => {
|
||||
const supabase = makeSupabase({ data: [CA_1930, CA_1931, CA_1932_EUR], error: null })
|
||||
runReconciliationMock.mockResolvedValue(emptyRunResult())
|
||||
|
||||
const result = await runUnattendedReconciliationSweep(
|
||||
supabase as never,
|
||||
'company-1',
|
||||
'user-1',
|
||||
{ dateFrom: '2026-01-01', dateTo: '2026-06-30' },
|
||||
)
|
||||
|
||||
expect(runReconciliationMock).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(3)
|
||||
|
||||
// Primary 1930: claims unassigned NULL-cash_account_id rows.
|
||||
expect(runReconciliationMock).toHaveBeenNthCalledWith(1, supabase, 'company-1', 'user-1', {
|
||||
dateFrom: '2026-01-01',
|
||||
dateTo: '2026-06-30',
|
||||
accountNumber: '1930',
|
||||
currency: 'SEK',
|
||||
cashAccountId: CA_1930.id,
|
||||
includeUnassigned: true,
|
||||
confidenceThreshold: DEFAULT_UNATTENDED_CONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD,
|
||||
persistSuggestions: true,
|
||||
})
|
||||
// Non-primary same-currency 1931: strict scope, never claims NULL rows.
|
||||
expect(runReconciliationMock).toHaveBeenNthCalledWith(2, supabase, 'company-1', 'user-1', {
|
||||
dateFrom: '2026-01-01',
|
||||
dateTo: '2026-06-30',
|
||||
accountNumber: '1931',
|
||||
currency: 'SEK',
|
||||
cashAccountId: CA_1931.id,
|
||||
includeUnassigned: false,
|
||||
confidenceThreshold: DEFAULT_UNATTENDED_CONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD,
|
||||
persistSuggestions: true,
|
||||
})
|
||||
// Foreign account reconciles in its own currency.
|
||||
expect(runReconciliationMock).toHaveBeenNthCalledWith(3, supabase, 'company-1', 'user-1', {
|
||||
dateFrom: '2026-01-01',
|
||||
dateTo: '2026-06-30',
|
||||
accountNumber: '1932',
|
||||
currency: 'EUR',
|
||||
cashAccountId: CA_1932_EUR.id,
|
||||
includeUnassigned: false,
|
||||
confidenceThreshold: DEFAULT_UNATTENDED_CONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD,
|
||||
persistSuggestions: true,
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
expect(result.accounts).toHaveLength(3)
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
it('falls back to a single legacy 1930/SEK run when the company has no cash_accounts rows', async () => {
|
||||
const supabase = makeSupabase({ data: [], error: null })
|
||||
runReconciliationMock.mockResolvedValue(emptyRunResult({ applied: 2 }))
|
||||
|
||||
const result = await runUnattendedReconciliationSweep(supabase as never, 'company-1', 'user-1')
|
||||
|
||||
expect(runReconciliationMock).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(1)
|
||||
expect(runReconciliationMock).toHaveBeenCalledWith(supabase, 'company-1', 'user-1', {
|
||||
dateFrom: undefined,
|
||||
dateTo: undefined,
|
||||
accountNumber: '1930',
|
||||
currency: 'SEK',
|
||||
cashAccountId: undefined,
|
||||
includeUnassigned: true,
|
||||
confidenceThreshold: DEFAULT_UNATTENDED_CONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD,
|
||||
persistSuggestions: true,
|
||||
})
|
||||
expect(result.applied).toBe(2)
|
||||
expect(result.accounts[0].cashAccountId).toBeNull()
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
it('aggregates per-account results into sweep totals', async () => {
|
||||
const supabase = makeSupabase({ data: [CA_1930, CA_1931], error: null })
|
||||
runReconciliationMock
|
||||
.mockResolvedValueOnce(
|
||||
emptyRunResult({ applied: 3, skippedBelowThreshold: 2, matches: [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] }),
|
||||
)
|
||||
.mockResolvedValueOnce(emptyRunResult({ applied: 1, errors: 1, matches: [1, 2] }))
|
||||
|
||||
const result = await runUnattendedReconciliationSweep(supabase as never, 'company-1', 'user-1')
|
||||
|
||||
expect(result.applied).toBe(4)
|
||||
expect(result.errors).toBe(1)
|
||||
expect(result.skippedBelowThreshold).toBe(2)
|
||||
expect(result.accounts[0]).toMatchObject({ accountNumber: '1930', applied: 3, proposed: 5 })
|
||||
expect(result.accounts[1]).toMatchObject({ accountNumber: '1931', applied: 1, proposed: 2 })
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
it('aggregates suggested and derives unmatched from the candidate pool', async () => {
|
||||
const supabase = makeSupabase({ data: [CA_1930, CA_1931], error: null })
|
||||
runReconciliationMock
|
||||
.mockResolvedValueOnce(
|
||||
emptyRunResult({ applied: 5, suggested: 2, candidates: 10, matches: [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7] }),
|
||||
)
|
||||
.mockResolvedValueOnce(emptyRunResult({ applied: 1, suggested: 0, candidates: 3, matches: [1] }))
|
||||
|
||||
const result = await runUnattendedReconciliationSweep(supabase as never, 'company-1', 'user-1')
|
||||
|
||||
expect(result.applied).toBe(6)
|
||||
expect(result.suggested).toBe(2)
|
||||
// 13 candidates, 6 auto-linked, 2 suggested: 5 rows left for the backstop.
|
||||
expect(result.unmatched).toBe(5)
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
it('one account failing does not abort the others; the failure counts as one error', async () => {
|
||||
const supabase = makeSupabase({ data: [CA_1930, CA_1931], error: null })
|
||||
runReconciliationMock
|
||||
.mockRejectedValueOnce(new Error('transient'))
|
||||
.mockResolvedValueOnce(emptyRunResult({ applied: 2, matches: [1, 2] }))
|
||||
|
||||
const result = await runUnattendedReconciliationSweep(supabase as never, 'company-1', 'user-1')
|
||||
|
||||
expect(runReconciliationMock).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(2)
|
||||
expect(result.errors).toBe(1)
|
||||
expect(result.applied).toBe(2)
|
||||
expect(result.accounts[0]).toMatchObject({ accountNumber: '1930', applied: 0, errors: 1 })
|
||||
expect(result.accounts[1]).toMatchObject({ accountNumber: '1931', applied: 2, errors: 0 })
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
it('throws when the cash_accounts lookup fails (never degrades to the pooled run)', async () => {
|
||||
const supabase = makeSupabase({ data: null, error: { message: 'rls denied' } })
|
||||
|
||||
await expect(
|
||||
runUnattendedReconciliationSweep(supabase as never, 'company-1', 'user-1'),
|
||||
).rejects.toThrow('Kunde inte hämta kassakonton')
|
||||
expect(runReconciliationMock).not.toHaveBeenCalled()
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
it('carries errors into the stamped summary so a crashed account never reads as "all done"', async () => {
|
||||
const supabase = makeSupabase({ data: [CA_1930, CA_1931], error: null })
|
||||
runReconciliationMock
|
||||
.mockResolvedValueOnce(emptyRunResult({ applied: 5, candidates: 5, matches: [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] }))
|
||||
// 1931 throws: its candidates never enter the pool, so unmatched: 0
|
||||
// would be a lie without the errors field.
|
||||
.mockRejectedValueOnce(new Error('transient'))
|
||||
|
||||
const result = await runUnattendedReconciliationSweep(supabase as never, 'company-1', 'user-1', {
|
||||
dateFrom: '2026-01-01',
|
||||
dateTo: '2026-06-30',
|
||||
})
|
||||
const summary = toSweepSummary(result, { dateFrom: '2026-01-01', dateTo: '2026-06-30' })
|
||||
|
||||
expect(summary.auto_linked).toBe(5)
|
||||
expect(summary.unmatched).toBe(0)
|
||||
expect(summary.errors).toBe(1)
|
||||
expect(summary.date_from).toBe('2026-01-01')
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
it('honors an explicit confidenceThreshold override', async () => {
|
||||
const supabase = makeSupabase({ data: [CA_1930], error: null })
|
||||
runReconciliationMock.mockResolvedValue(emptyRunResult())
|
||||
|
||||
await runUnattendedReconciliationSweep(supabase as never, 'company-1', 'user-1', {
|
||||
confidenceThreshold: 0.95,
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
expect(runReconciliationMock).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
|
||||
supabase,
|
||||
'company-1',
|
||||
'user-1',
|
||||
expect.objectContaining({ confidenceThreshold: 0.95 }),
|
||||
)
|
||||
})
|
||||
})
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user