* feat: voucher linking, recovery ops, and salary overrides Adds reversible/correction-style write paths that customers and agents have been asking for, plus per-run salary employee overrides. Invoice → voucher linking - POST /api/invoices/[id]/link-to-voucher and GET /api/invoices/[id]/voucher-candidates - lib/invoices/voucher-matching.ts with full + pg test coverage - LinkVoucherPicker UI in PaymentBookingDialog - pending_operations.operation_type expanded with link_invoice_voucher (medium risk) and a (journal_entry_id, invoice_id) unique guard - MCP: gnubok_find_voucher_candidates_for_invoice and gnubok_link_invoice_to_voucher tools SIE undo - POST /api/import/sie/[id]/undo + undo_sie_import RPC - sie_imports.status gains 'undone' - ImportResultStep surfaces the action; structured error SIE_UNDO_FAILED Edit-recreate journal entries - POST /api/bookkeeping/journal-entries/[id]/edit-recreate - Bookkeeping detail page wires it into the existing edit flow Delete-last-voucher clears IB link - Trigger + pg test ensure deleting the last voucher of a period nulls the opening_balance_journal_entry_id link so a re-import lands cleanly Salary employee overrides - salary_run_employees gains per-run override fields + migration - lib/salary/effective-values.ts centralises resolved values; all payslip, payment, AGI, KU, and booking routes read through it - SalaryOverridePanel on the employee detail page Account classifier - lib/bookkeeping/account-classifier.ts + tests; AddAccountDialog uses it - backfill-import-accounts script updated Misc - toast: minor styling tweak - AGI generate-declaration: respect effective values - structured-errors: new LINK_INVOICE_VOUCHER namespace Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * feat: add link_invoice_voucher operation type to pending_operations * feat: refactor salary run calculations and update error handling for SIE imports * fix: PR review feedback on voucher linking and SIE recovery pg-real (blocking): - tests/pg/delete-last-voucher-ib: drop posted_at = now() from the seed UPDATE — journal_entries has no posted_at column. - lib/invoices/__tests__/voucher-matching.pg: seed the posted voucher before closing the fiscal period so enforce_period_lock doesn't block the INSERT during setup. voucher-matching error codes and rollback: - Add LINK_VOUCHER_DB_ERROR (HTTP 500) and return it on real invoice UPDATE / payment INSERT failures. Previously these returned LINK_VOUCHER_VOUCHER_NOT_FOUND (404) which the pending-op dispatcher auto-rejects on transient DB errors. - Log rollback failures explicitly so an invoice left in a half-linked state (advanced status, no payment row) surfaces for manual reconciliation instead of disappearing silently. resyncNextPeriodOpeningBalance ordering: - Create the new IB first, relink the period FK, then storno the old IB. Previously the storno ran first; if createJournalEntry failed the next period was left with a reversed IB and nothing to replace it, and executeSIEImport swallows the error as a non-fatal warning. replace_period_opening_balance_link: - Tighten role check to owner/admin (was owner/admin/member). Matches delete_last_voucher and undo_sie_import. Data minimisation: - /api/invoices/[id]/voucher-candidates and the matching MCP tools now project only the invoice and customer fields the matcher reads, instead of returning the full customer row. Schema bounds: - SalaryEmployeeOverrideSchema caps each numeric override at 10 MSEK to catch typos before they reach the ledger or AGI. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(tests): supply user_id when seeding voucher_sequences voucher_sequences.user_id is NOT NULL (per the multi-tenant refactor in 20260330130000). The previous test seed only set company_id / fiscal_period_id / voucher_series, which made the seed fail with a constraint violation on the latest pg-real run. Pass the same userId used elsewhere in the seed helper. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(tests): scope delete-last-voucher RPC assertions inside the tx withUserContext always ROLLBACKs, so any DELETE the RPC performs is discarded when the callback returns. The previous test then queried journal_entries via a fresh getPool() connection that only saw the pre-RPC committed seed state — hence "expected '1' to be '0'". Move every post-RPC assertion (entry count, period FK clear, opening_balances_set flip, audit log entry, sie_imports clear) inside the same withUserContext callback so they observe the uncommitted state before ROLLBACK fires. Also fix the sie_imports INSERT: the column is `filename`, not `file_name`, and `sie_type` is NOT NULL. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(tests): assert against the IB-marker audit row directly DELETE on journal_entries fires two audit_log writes: the generic write_audit_log() trigger row ("Deleted journal_entries record") and the delete_last_voucher RPC's explicit "(was period IB)" entry. Both land at the same statement_timestamp(), so ORDER BY created_at DESC LIMIT 1 returned the trigger row non-deterministically in CI. Switch to a presence check with a LIKE filter on the IB marker so the test verifies what it actually cares about — that the RPC's IB-aware audit row exists. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(db): set company_id on delete_last_voucher audit_log rows 20260528120000_delete_last_voucher_clears_ib_link.sql inserts directly into audit_log without setting company_id. audit_log's SELECT policy filters company_id IN user_company_ids(), so those rows landed with company_id=NULL and were invisible to every reader — only the generic write_audit_log() trigger row remained visible. That broke BFL audit- trail intent: the "(was period IB)" provenance row was never readable. Republish delete_last_voucher with p_company_id populated on both audit_log INSERTs (draft path and posted path). Behavior is otherwise unchanged; the pg-real test for the IB-clear flow now sees the RPC-written marker row as expected. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-authored-by: Emil <emilmattsson14@gmail.com>
272 lines
8.4 KiB
TypeScript
272 lines
8.4 KiB
TypeScript
import type { SupabaseClient } from '@supabase/supabase-js'
|
|
import type { Invoice, Transaction, Customer } from '@/types'
|
|
|
|
export interface InvoiceMatch {
|
|
invoice: Invoice & { customer?: Customer }
|
|
confidence: number
|
|
matchReason: string
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
* Confidence thresholds for invoice matching. Shared with voucher-matching.ts
|
|
* so the two flows (transaction→invoice and existing-verifikat→invoice) rank
|
|
* candidates on the same scale.
|
|
*/
|
|
export const CONFIDENCE = {
|
|
OCR_REFERENCE_MATCH: 0.99,
|
|
EXACT_AMOUNT_CUSTOMER: 0.95,
|
|
EXACT_AMOUNT_ONLY: 0.80,
|
|
FUZZY_AMOUNT_CUSTOMER: 0.70,
|
|
FUZZY_AMOUNT_ONLY: 0.50,
|
|
MIN_THRESHOLD: 0.50,
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
* Fuzzy amount tolerance (±1% for FX fees)
|
|
*/
|
|
const FUZZY_TOLERANCE = 0.01
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
* Check if two amounts match exactly (within rounding)
|
|
*/
|
|
export function amountsMatchExact(transactionAmount: number, invoiceTotal: number): boolean {
|
|
// Round to 2 decimal places for comparison
|
|
const txRounded = Math.round(transactionAmount * 100) / 100
|
|
const invRounded = Math.round(invoiceTotal * 100) / 100
|
|
return txRounded === invRounded
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
* Check if two amounts match within fuzzy tolerance (±1%)
|
|
*/
|
|
export function amountsMatchFuzzy(transactionAmount: number, invoiceTotal: number): boolean {
|
|
if (invoiceTotal === 0) return false
|
|
const diff = Math.abs(transactionAmount - invoiceTotal)
|
|
// Cap fuzzy tolerance at 500 SEK to prevent false positives on large invoices
|
|
const tolerance = Math.min(invoiceTotal * FUZZY_TOLERANCE, 500)
|
|
return diff <= tolerance
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
* Check if customer name appears in transaction counterparty
|
|
*/
|
|
export function customerNameMatches(
|
|
customerName: string | undefined,
|
|
transactionDescription: string,
|
|
merchantName: string | null
|
|
): boolean {
|
|
if (!customerName) return false
|
|
|
|
const searchTerms = customerName.toLowerCase().split(/\s+/).filter(term => term.length > 2)
|
|
const searchText = `${transactionDescription} ${merchantName || ''}`.toLowerCase()
|
|
|
|
// Check if any significant word from customer name appears in transaction
|
|
return searchTerms.some(term => searchText.includes(term))
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
* Calculate confidence score and match reason for an invoice match
|
|
*/
|
|
export function calculateMatchScore(
|
|
transaction: Transaction,
|
|
invoice: Invoice & { customer?: Customer }
|
|
): { confidence: number; matchReason: string } {
|
|
const transactionAmount = transaction.amount
|
|
const invoiceTotal = invoice.total
|
|
|
|
const exactAmount = amountsMatchExact(transactionAmount, invoiceTotal)
|
|
const fuzzyAmount = !exactAmount && amountsMatchFuzzy(transactionAmount, invoiceTotal)
|
|
const customerMatch = customerNameMatches(
|
|
invoice.customer?.name,
|
|
transaction.description,
|
|
transaction.merchant_name
|
|
)
|
|
|
|
if (exactAmount && customerMatch) {
|
|
return {
|
|
confidence: CONFIDENCE.EXACT_AMOUNT_CUSTOMER,
|
|
matchReason: `Exakt belopp (${invoiceTotal} ${invoice.currency}) och kundnamn matchar`,
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if (exactAmount) {
|
|
return {
|
|
confidence: CONFIDENCE.EXACT_AMOUNT_ONLY,
|
|
matchReason: `Exakt belopp (${invoiceTotal} ${invoice.currency})`,
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if (fuzzyAmount && customerMatch) {
|
|
return {
|
|
confidence: CONFIDENCE.FUZZY_AMOUNT_CUSTOMER,
|
|
matchReason: `Belopp nära (±1%) och kundnamn matchar`,
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if (fuzzyAmount) {
|
|
return {
|
|
confidence: CONFIDENCE.FUZZY_AMOUNT_ONLY,
|
|
matchReason: `Belopp nära (±1%)`,
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return { confidence: 0, matchReason: '' }
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
* Find invoices that potentially match a bank transaction
|
|
*
|
|
* Only matches income transactions (amount > 0) against unpaid invoices
|
|
* Returns matches sorted by confidence, filtered to >= 50% confidence
|
|
*/
|
|
export async function findMatchingInvoices(
|
|
supabase: SupabaseClient,
|
|
companyId: string,
|
|
transaction: Transaction
|
|
): Promise<InvoiceMatch[]> {
|
|
// Only match income transactions
|
|
if (transaction.amount <= 0) {
|
|
return []
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// Query unpaid invoices (sent or overdue) with customer info
|
|
const { data: invoices, error } = await supabase
|
|
.from('invoices')
|
|
.select(`
|
|
*,
|
|
customer:customers(*)
|
|
`)
|
|
.eq('company_id', companyId)
|
|
.in('status', ['sent', 'overdue', 'partially_paid'])
|
|
.order('due_date', { ascending: true })
|
|
|
|
if (error || !invoices) {
|
|
// Failed to fetch invoices — return empty matches
|
|
return []
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// Defensive filter: exclude invoices that already have a payment voucher
|
|
// attached but whose status leaked (still 'sent'/'overdue'). Partially-paid
|
|
// invoices can legitimately take more payments, so they pass through.
|
|
// Without this, a status leak would double-book the receipt.
|
|
const fullCandidateIds = invoices
|
|
.filter((inv) => inv.status === 'sent' || inv.status === 'overdue')
|
|
.map((inv) => inv.id as string)
|
|
const paidIds = new Set<string>()
|
|
if (fullCandidateIds.length > 0) {
|
|
const { data: paymentRows } = await supabase
|
|
.from('invoice_payments')
|
|
.select('invoice_id')
|
|
.eq('company_id', companyId)
|
|
.in('invoice_id', fullCandidateIds)
|
|
.not('journal_entry_id', 'is', null)
|
|
for (const row of paymentRows ?? []) {
|
|
paidIds.add((row as { invoice_id: string }).invoice_id)
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
const filteredInvoices = invoices.filter((inv) => !paidIds.has(inv.id as string))
|
|
if (filteredInvoices.length === 0) {
|
|
return []
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
const matches: InvoiceMatch[] = []
|
|
|
|
// OCR/Bankgiro reference matching — highest confidence
|
|
// Swedish standard: match transaction reference to invoice OCR number
|
|
const txReference = (transaction as Transaction & { reference?: string | null }).reference
|
|
if (txReference) {
|
|
const normalizedRef = txReference.replace(/\s+/g, '')
|
|
for (const invoice of filteredInvoices) {
|
|
// Match against invoice_number (used as OCR reference in Swedish payments)
|
|
const invoiceRef = invoice.invoice_number?.replace(/\s+/g, '')
|
|
if (invoiceRef && normalizedRef === invoiceRef) {
|
|
matches.push({
|
|
invoice: invoice as Invoice & { customer?: Customer },
|
|
confidence: CONFIDENCE.OCR_REFERENCE_MATCH,
|
|
matchReason: `OCR-referens matchar fakturanummer ${invoice.invoice_number}`,
|
|
})
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// If we found an OCR match, return immediately (highest possible confidence)
|
|
if (matches.length > 0) {
|
|
return matches
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
for (const invoice of filteredInvoices) {
|
|
// Currency filter - must match or be SEK equivalent
|
|
const currencyMatch =
|
|
invoice.currency === transaction.currency ||
|
|
(transaction.currency === 'SEK' && invoice.total_sek != null)
|
|
|
|
if (!currencyMatch) continue
|
|
|
|
// Use remaining_amount for partially paid invoices, otherwise total
|
|
const invoiceAmount = invoice.remaining_amount ?? invoice.total
|
|
|
|
// Use SEK amount for comparison if currencies differ
|
|
const compareAmount =
|
|
invoice.currency === transaction.currency
|
|
? invoiceAmount
|
|
: (() => {
|
|
if (invoice.total_sek && invoice.total) {
|
|
return Math.round((invoiceAmount / invoice.total) * invoice.total_sek * 100) / 100
|
|
}
|
|
return invoiceAmount
|
|
})()
|
|
|
|
const transactionAmount = transaction.amount
|
|
|
|
// Check if amounts are close enough to consider
|
|
const amountDiff = Math.abs(transactionAmount - compareAmount)
|
|
const tolerance = compareAmount * FUZZY_TOLERANCE
|
|
if (amountDiff > tolerance && transactionAmount !== compareAmount) {
|
|
continue
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// Calculate score
|
|
const invoiceWithAdjustedTotal = {
|
|
...invoice,
|
|
total: compareAmount, // Use the comparable amount
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
const { confidence, matchReason } = calculateMatchScore(
|
|
transaction,
|
|
invoiceWithAdjustedTotal as Invoice & { customer?: Customer }
|
|
)
|
|
|
|
if (confidence >= CONFIDENCE.MIN_THRESHOLD) {
|
|
matches.push({
|
|
invoice: invoice as Invoice & { customer?: Customer },
|
|
confidence,
|
|
matchReason,
|
|
})
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// Sort by confidence descending
|
|
matches.sort((a, b) => b.confidence - a.confidence)
|
|
|
|
return matches
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
* Get the best matching invoice for a transaction
|
|
* Returns the highest confidence match if it meets the threshold
|
|
*/
|
|
export async function getBestInvoiceMatch(
|
|
supabase: SupabaseClient,
|
|
companyId: string,
|
|
transaction: Transaction,
|
|
minConfidence: number = 0.80
|
|
): Promise<InvoiceMatch | null> {
|
|
const matches = await findMatchingInvoices(supabase, companyId, transaction)
|
|
|
|
if (matches.length > 0 && matches[0].confidence >= minConfidence) {
|
|
return matches[0]
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return null
|
|
}
|