The last of the paused branches, from its "not for merge" checkpoint:
extraction in ledger-import (text, pages, page images; capped, caught),
journaled as attachment.text_extracted; dedup by hash with
books.find_attachment and books.consolidate_duplicates; annotations and
books.set_entry_settles; the company record categories; the two fuzz
targets; feature attachment_text. Nineteen files conflicted with the
four P4b merges, resolved as plan 8.0.2 says: P6 retakes schema 18 (it
had taken 16, which S4.3 holds; S5 holds 17); the tool table is 129 and
the destructive count 31; both sides' appends kept with their seams
restored; one B-27 paragraph naming every feature; in the old-books
fixture P6's hand-written reimbursement is entry 7 (its ids collided
with S4.3's invoice); the replay fuzzer's list gains S7's
invoice.written_off; S4.3's issued-PDF test expects the extraction
record P6 journals right after a filing.
One integration defect between S7 and P6, found by the arap property
test and fixed here: under P6's dedup, a write-off whose evidence bytes
were filed already (the same collection letter for a second write-off of
the same invoice) was refused only after its entry had been journaled,
at the final link to the invoice ("already linked"). The write-off now
resolves the dedup before anything is journaled and keeps a link the
record already has to the invoice instead of refusing it; an explicit
existing_attachment_id already on an entry is still refused (S7's
one-receipt-once rule). P6's gate never ran before the pause; it runs on
main after this merge, and its ledger-store -> ledger-import dependency
is the open review point (plan 8.0.1).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01HS8WZziDnyxunC23MUxrLp
The fourth of the paused branches: Ledger::write_off and the bad_debts
control role, invoice.written_off with its evidence filed in the same
store call, books.write_off_invoice, the write-off on the timeline and
in Needs attention, Lean writeOff_within_bounds, rules.md B-41 and the
bookspec examples. Twenty-eight files conflicted with the S4.4, S5 and
S6 merges; resolved as plan 8.0.2 says, keeping both sides' appends with
their seams restored, and: the scope table at 125; S7's law numbered 37;
B-41 placed before B-42; the handbook's step 4 and recovery procedures
folded into the one invoices-and-bills section; S7's wire tests in their
own module with the confirm S4.4's contract needs; S7's copy of the
payment steps dropped (S6 replaced them with Ledger::settle) and its
write-off journaled through S6's journal_auto_lines; in the old-books
fixture S7's hand-written write-off moved to a second invoice, since
S6's hand-written payment settles invoice 1 in full.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01HS8WZziDnyxunC23MUxrLp
The books record that an invoice went out but do not chase it. U0b's
one attention engine now lists two items the sent record makes possible,
in the viewer's Needs attention and in books.start's next steps alike:
- "Invoice INV-0007 was never sent": an issued invoice (a number) still
Open or Partial, with no send recorded, once today is past its issue
date plus invoicing.unsent_days (default 2). A legacy invoice with no
number is exempt, and so is a void or settled one.
- "Invoice INV-0007 is overdue: remind the customer": the invoice is
overdue and its last send is older than invoicing.reminder_days
(default 14). An invoice never sent gets the first item, not this one.
Both are Todo, open the invoice, and offer books.mark_sent with its
invoice and the tool's defaults. The viewer maps the new
Target::Invoice to its invoice page (one line; items still come only
from ledger-package), and the two lists cannot drift.
Tests: an_unsent_invoice_is_listed_until_a_send_clears_it (the overview
draws it; attention-unsent-invoice.png; a send clears it),
a_legacy_invoice_with_no_number_is_never_listed_as_unsent,
an_overdue_invoice_with_an_old_send_is_asked_to_remind, and
an_unsent_invoice_is_on_both_lists (viewer and books.start, step
books.mark_sent on invoice:1). The existing attention parity test stays
green.
The viewer's invoice page already drew a WriteOff movement; now the
fixture proves it: a written-off invoice reads Written off, owes nothing,
and its timeline's "Written off" row opens the entry (the screenshot
invoice-written-off).
Needs attention gains the one item the tax rule asks for: a write-off
made this calendar year is listed, one per invoice, as "Write-off
awaiting the CPA's note", with what was written off, the day, and the
prompt that opens the document. Whether a debt is worthless, and in
which year, is a tax judgment that stays with the CPA (plan 8.3.16); the
books flag it and keep the evidence beside it until the year ends. The
item is computed in ledger-package's one attention function, so the
viewer and books.start see it alike; view_model.rs compares the two reads
on the same books.
The handbook's invoices-and-bills section starts here (S4.5 adds the
issue, terms and payment steps around it): step 4 says when to void, to
write off, or to reverse, and the recovery procedures D-49 records — the
same year, reverse the write-off and record the payment; a later year, a
plain entry to a bad-debt-recoveries revenue account, the invoice staying
written off (IRC §111).
Tests: a_write_off_shows_on_the_timeline,
a_write_off_is_flagged_for_the_cpa.
books.start passed Integrity::default() to the attention engine, so it
asserted "database matches, no file failures". On a book whose database
differs from the journal, or whose stored file is missing or corrupt, the
viewer showed the database/stored-files items and the server did not: the
two lists diverged exactly where they matter most.
Call find, which computes the check: every distinct stored blob is read
and hash-checked once (a damaged blob is still reported per attachment
filed from it), and Store::disk_check now makes the viewer's comparison
through a snapshot of its data directory instead of reporting a match.
The parity test now damages its own fixture (removes the receipt's blob,
then changes a projected account row) and asserts both lists still agree
item for item and both name the damage. On the demo books (138
attachments, 138 distinct blobs, debug build) books.start takes about
0.26 s warm, 0.29 s cold, so the real check costs no decision.
Needs attention was computed by the viewer alone, while books.start
hand-picked a handful of next steps. The human's list and the agent's
could disagree, and a new item had to be written twice (or, as
books.start showed, not at all).
Move the engine to ledger-package over PackageBooks: one function,
find/find_with(books, today, settings, integrity), reads the ledger, the
journal's event types (an entry's origin), the attachments and their
links, the statements, the reconciliations, and the database check. The
viewer's attention module now only maps Target to Route; books.start
turns the same items into its next steps (why = the item's title, top 12),
so the list the human sees and the steps the agent gets cannot drift.
PackageBooks gains settings, journal, statements, reconciliations and
disk_check, implemented for Store and Snapshot, so both views answer
alike. The W-9, reconciliation and 1099 predicates move beside the items
to keep one copy. ledger-package gains ledger-config and serde_json (the
receipt policy and the tool arguments the items carry).
Tests: view_model.rs and spec_kept.rs pass unchanged; the new
attention_parity.rs compares the viewer and books.start item for item on
the demo books and on a book written entry by entry. just check green.
swaitsandClaude Fable 5.1