* feat(mcp): already-explained voucher guard at stage and commit for match_batch_allocate The dashboard match-batch route refused BATCH_TX_POSSIBLE_DUPLICATE when posted, unlinked vouchers already summed to the bank row (PR #2300), but the MCP door (gnubok_match_batch_allocate staging + commitMatchBatchAllocate) called the RPC with no guard, so an agent could book a Bankgirot aggregate a second time. The detector existed once; the guard lived in one door. One shared decision helper, lib/invoices/already-explained-guard.ts, now sits on top of the existing detectors (no fork) and is called by the dashboard route, the MCP staging tools and the commit executors: - gnubok_match_batch_allocate refuses to stage, coded BATCH_TX_POSSIBLE_DUPLICATE, naming the vouchers, the reconcile_match / link_transaction_to_journal_entry call that resolves the row, and the exact force + expected_journal_entry_ids binding. - commitMatchBatchAllocate runs the same guard before the RPC and re-validates a staged force binding against the set detected at commit, so a stale approval cannot book a duplicate; 409 auto-rejects with the vouchers in result_data. - force + expected_journal_entry_ids on the tool mirror MatchBatchSchema; an honoured override stages with a compliance_warning and, after the booking succeeds, writes BankTransactionDuplicateDismissed to behandlingshistorik (dashboard route included; it only logged before). - gnubok_match_transaction_to_invoice and commitMatchTransactionInvoice get the dashboard's 1:1 soft-duplicate guard (MATCH_INVOICE_POSSIBLE_DUPLICATE / MATCH_INVOICE_FORCE_CANDIDATE_MISMATCH) with force + expected_journal_entry_id; at commit it runs before the storno. - Registry: both duplicate codes gain retryable: false and a remediation. Catalog payload held under the 60K ceiling by trimming the two tools' own descriptions (59 988 measured, ledger entry in payload-size.bench.test.ts). Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_019SaJfqNi4VmsG8FMKq99G6 * docs(decisions): record the 2026-09-06 ten-issue batch's first-principles choices Carries the DECISIONS.md lines for PRs #2337 #2339 #2340 #2341 #2342 #2343 #2344 #2345 #2346 #2347 in one place so the ten branches do not conflict on this file. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_019SaJfqNi4VmsG8FMKq99G6 * fix(mcp): refuse an unverifiable forced override, surface a failed duplicate check, validate the binding (#2294 review) Review round on PR #2346 (CodeRabbit + compliance): - guardAlreadyExplained returned 'clear' when the detector threw even with force=true, so a forced 1:N override could book without re-validating expected_journal_entry_ids and left no behandlingshistorik record. It now returns a distinct 'unverifiable' outcome under force (mirrors guardDuplicatePaymentVoucher); the dashboard route, the MCP staging tool and the commit executor all refuse it with the new registry code BATCH_TX_EXPLAINED_CHECK_FAILED (409, retryable, remediation). Regression tests on every caller. - A detector failure without force still fails open at stage time, but no longer silently: the tools track onDetectError and stage a complianceNote, so preview_data.compliance_warning is set on both match_batch_allocate (GenericPreview renders it) and match_transaction_invoice (MatchTransactionInvoicePreview now renders data.compliance_warning through AttnLine). - expected_journal_entry_ids / expected_journal_entry_id are validated at the MCP boundary (array of 1 to 10 non-empty strings / non-empty string) and refused with VALIDATION_ERROR instead of being silently filtered. No schema description text added: catalog payload unchanged. - RoPA: .compliance/ropa.yaml gains bookkeeping.duplicate_dismissal_history for the BankTransactionDuplicateDismissed record (Art. 6(1)(c), BFNAR 2013:2 p. 9.16, retention per BFL 7 kap, stored in processing_history). Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> --------- Co-authored-by: Jakob Wennberg <311770904+jakobwennberg-oss@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
208 lines
8.4 KiB
TypeScript
208 lines
8.4 KiB
TypeScript
/**
|
|
* gnubok_match_transaction_to_invoice: the soft-duplicate guard at stage time
|
|
* (issue #2294, parity with the dashboard match-invoice route's
|
|
* MATCH_INVOICE_POSSIBLE_DUPLICATE / MATCH_INVOICE_FORCE_CANDIDATE_MISMATCH).
|
|
*
|
|
* A manual verifikation that already books the receipt is surfaced before
|
|
* anything is staged, with the voucher named and the link call that resolves
|
|
* it; force is bound to that exact candidate and travels with the op so the
|
|
* commit executor can re-validate it.
|
|
*/
|
|
import { describe, it, expect, vi, beforeEach } from 'vitest'
|
|
import { createQueuedMockSupabase } from '@/tests/helpers'
|
|
|
|
const { mockDetectCandidate } = vi.hoisted(() => ({ mockDetectCandidate: vi.fn() }))
|
|
vi.mock('@/lib/invoices/duplicate-payment-detection', () => ({
|
|
detectDuplicatePaymentVoucher: mockDetectCandidate,
|
|
detectExplainingVoucherSetForTransaction: vi.fn(async () => null),
|
|
}))
|
|
|
|
import { tools } from '../server'
|
|
|
|
const match = tools.find((t) => t.name === 'gnubok_match_transaction_to_invoice')!
|
|
|
|
const TX_ID = '11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111'
|
|
const INV_ID = '22222222-2222-4222-8222-222222222222'
|
|
const JE_MANUAL = '55555555-5555-4555-8555-555555555555'
|
|
const JE_OTHER = '66666666-6666-4666-8666-666666666666'
|
|
|
|
const txRow = {
|
|
id: TX_ID,
|
|
description: 'SWISH INBET',
|
|
merchant_name: null,
|
|
amount: 1000,
|
|
currency: 'SEK',
|
|
amount_sek: null,
|
|
exchange_rate: null,
|
|
date: '2026-05-15',
|
|
invoice_id: null,
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
const invoiceRow = {
|
|
id: INV_ID,
|
|
invoice_number: 'F-2026001',
|
|
status: 'sent',
|
|
document_type: 'invoice',
|
|
total: 1000,
|
|
currency: 'SEK',
|
|
invoice_date: '2026-05-01',
|
|
customer: { name: 'Kund AB' },
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
const candidate = {
|
|
journal_entry_id: JE_MANUAL,
|
|
voucher_label: 'A12',
|
|
entry_date: '2026-05-15',
|
|
description: 'Inbetalning faktura',
|
|
amount: 1000,
|
|
bank_account_number: '1930',
|
|
reason: 'exact_amount_same_date',
|
|
amount_verified: true,
|
|
unverified_reason: null,
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
function run(supabase: unknown, extra: Record<string, unknown> = {}) {
|
|
return match.execute(
|
|
{ transaction_id: TX_ID, invoice_id: INV_ID, ...extra },
|
|
'company-1',
|
|
'user-1',
|
|
supabase as never,
|
|
{ type: 'api_key' } as never,
|
|
)
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
function enqueuePreGuard(enqueue: (r: { data?: unknown; error?: unknown }) => void) {
|
|
enqueue({ data: txRow, error: null })
|
|
enqueue({ data: invoiceRow, error: null })
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
function enqueueStage(enqueue: (r: { data?: unknown; error?: unknown }) => void) {
|
|
enqueue({ data: { bookkeeping_locked_through: null }, error: null }) // company_settings
|
|
enqueue({ data: { id: 'fp-1', is_closed: false, locked_at: null }, error: null }) // fiscal_periods
|
|
enqueue({ data: { id: 'op-match-1' }, error: null }) // pending_operations insert
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
beforeEach(() => {
|
|
vi.clearAllMocks()
|
|
mockDetectCandidate.mockResolvedValue(null)
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
describe('gnubok_match_transaction_to_invoice: soft-duplicate guard at stage time', () => {
|
|
it('refuses to stage, coded MATCH_INVOICE_POSSIBLE_DUPLICATE, naming the voucher, the link tool and the force binding', async () => {
|
|
mockDetectCandidate.mockResolvedValue(candidate)
|
|
const { supabase, enqueue } = createQueuedMockSupabase()
|
|
enqueuePreGuard(enqueue)
|
|
|
|
const err = await run(supabase).then(() => null, (e: Error & { code?: string }) => e)
|
|
expect(err).toBeInstanceOf(Error)
|
|
expect(err!.code).toBe('MATCH_INVOICE_POSSIBLE_DUPLICATE')
|
|
expect(err!.message).toContain('verifikat A12')
|
|
expect(err!.message).toContain('gnubok_link_transaction_to_journal_entry')
|
|
expect(err!.message).toContain(`expected_journal_entry_id="${JE_MANUAL}"`)
|
|
expect(mockDetectCandidate).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
|
|
supabase,
|
|
expect.objectContaining({ companyId: 'company-1', transactionId: TX_ID, transactionAmount: 1000, transactionCurrency: 'SEK' }),
|
|
)
|
|
const tables = (supabase.from as ReturnType<typeof vi.fn>).mock.calls.map((c) => c[0])
|
|
expect(tables).not.toContain('pending_operations')
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
it('stages with a compliance warning when force echoes the detected candidate, and persists the binding', async () => {
|
|
mockDetectCandidate.mockResolvedValue(candidate)
|
|
const { supabase, enqueue, findCall } = createQueuedMockSupabase()
|
|
enqueuePreGuard(enqueue)
|
|
enqueueStage(enqueue)
|
|
|
|
const result = (await run(supabase, { force: true, expected_journal_entry_id: JE_MANUAL })) as {
|
|
staged: boolean
|
|
operation_id?: string
|
|
preview: Record<string, unknown>
|
|
}
|
|
expect(result.staged).toBe(true)
|
|
expect(result.operation_id).toBe('op-match-1')
|
|
expect(result.preview.compliance_warning).toContain('A12')
|
|
const inserted = findCall('pending_operations', 'insert')?.[0] as { params: Record<string, unknown> }
|
|
expect(inserted.params).toMatchObject({
|
|
transaction_id: TX_ID,
|
|
invoice_id: INV_ID,
|
|
force: true,
|
|
expected_journal_entry_id: JE_MANUAL,
|
|
})
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
it('refuses a stale force id as MATCH_INVOICE_FORCE_CANDIDATE_MISMATCH', async () => {
|
|
mockDetectCandidate.mockResolvedValue(candidate)
|
|
const { supabase, enqueue } = createQueuedMockSupabase()
|
|
enqueuePreGuard(enqueue)
|
|
|
|
const err = await run(supabase, { force: true, expected_journal_entry_id: JE_OTHER }).then(
|
|
() => null,
|
|
(e: Error & { code?: string }) => e,
|
|
)
|
|
expect(err!.code).toBe('MATCH_INVOICE_FORCE_CANDIDATE_MISMATCH')
|
|
expect(err!.message).toContain(JE_OTHER)
|
|
expect(err!.message).toContain(JE_MANUAL)
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
it('refuses force when no candidate is detected any more (force is moot)', async () => {
|
|
const { supabase, enqueue } = createQueuedMockSupabase()
|
|
enqueuePreGuard(enqueue)
|
|
|
|
await expect(run(supabase, { force: true, expected_journal_entry_id: JE_MANUAL })).rejects.toMatchObject({
|
|
code: 'MATCH_INVOICE_FORCE_CANDIDATE_MISMATCH',
|
|
})
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
it('rejects force without expected_journal_entry_id before any query runs', async () => {
|
|
const { supabase } = createQueuedMockSupabase()
|
|
await expect(run(supabase, { force: true })).rejects.toMatchObject({ code: 'VALIDATION_ERROR' })
|
|
expect(supabase.from).not.toHaveBeenCalled()
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
it('rejects a non-string expected_journal_entry_id at the boundary instead of silently dropping it', async () => {
|
|
for (const bad of [42, '', [JE_MANUAL]]) {
|
|
const { supabase } = createQueuedMockSupabase()
|
|
await expect(run(supabase, { expected_journal_entry_id: bad })).rejects.toMatchObject({ code: 'VALIDATION_ERROR' })
|
|
expect(supabase.from).not.toHaveBeenCalled()
|
|
}
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
it('fails open when the detector throws without force, but the approval card says the check did not run', async () => {
|
|
mockDetectCandidate.mockRejectedValue(new Error('scan failed'))
|
|
const { supabase, enqueue, findCall } = createQueuedMockSupabase()
|
|
enqueuePreGuard(enqueue)
|
|
enqueueStage(enqueue)
|
|
|
|
const result = (await run(supabase)) as { staged: boolean; preview: Record<string, unknown> }
|
|
expect(result.staged).toBe(true)
|
|
expect(result.preview.compliance_warning).toContain('Dubblettkontrollen kunde inte köras')
|
|
// Persisted with the op: MatchTransactionInvoicePreview renders it on /pending.
|
|
const inserted = findCall('pending_operations', 'insert')?.[0] as { preview_data: Record<string, unknown> }
|
|
expect(inserted.preview_data.compliance_warning).toContain('Dubblettkontrollen kunde inte köras')
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
it('refuses force=true when the detector throws: an override that cannot be re-verified is never staged', async () => {
|
|
mockDetectCandidate.mockRejectedValue(new Error('scan failed'))
|
|
const { supabase, enqueue } = createQueuedMockSupabase()
|
|
enqueuePreGuard(enqueue)
|
|
|
|
await expect(run(supabase, { force: true, expected_journal_entry_id: JE_MANUAL })).rejects.toMatchObject({
|
|
code: 'MATCH_INVOICE_FORCE_CANDIDATE_MISMATCH',
|
|
})
|
|
const tables = (supabase.from as ReturnType<typeof vi.fn>).mock.calls.map((c) => c[0])
|
|
expect(tables).not.toContain('pending_operations')
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
it('stages a clean match without a binding or a warning', async () => {
|
|
const { supabase, enqueue, findCall } = createQueuedMockSupabase()
|
|
enqueuePreGuard(enqueue)
|
|
enqueueStage(enqueue)
|
|
|
|
const result = (await run(supabase)) as { staged: boolean; preview: Record<string, unknown> }
|
|
expect(result.staged).toBe(true)
|
|
expect(result.preview.compliance_warning).toBeUndefined()
|
|
const inserted = findCall('pending_operations', 'insert')?.[0] as { params: Record<string, unknown> }
|
|
expect(inserted.params).toEqual({ transaction_id: TX_ID, invoice_id: INV_ID })
|
|
})
|
|
})
|