Accounting reason: a confirm must act on the thing that was previewed.
Every tool with confirmed (post_entry, reverse_entry, run_schedules,
dispose_asset, reconcile, close_period, create_invoice, create_bill,
write_off_invoice, purge_tin, consolidate_duplicates, and the S6
settlement tools receive_payment and pay_bill, which gain confirmed and
preview on a clone of the ledger) returns preview (SHA-256 of the
canonical preview) and refuses a confirm whose preview is missing or
stale (stale_preview, before anything is written). A draft's digest is
its own state and the settings seq; an operation's is the tool, its
arguments as sent, the settings seq and the journal head seq, so another
session's write forces a re-preview (D-50).
New tools books.list_drafts, books.set_draft_state, books.discard_draft,
books.preview_entry; reports carry as_of_status (drafts open on or before
their end, unreconciled accounts, settings problems) and take strict; the
CPA package is refused while a draft dated in it is open unless
allow_open_drafts gives a reason, journaled as a decision;
books.digest takes since_seq (what was posted since a journal line,
backdated entries included: defect 6) and lists zero_net_accounts,
drafts_by_state and the reconciliation split. Needs attention gains
'draft awaiting receipt' beside 'draft not posted'; the drafts handbook
is rewritten. Every over-the-wire harness confirms the way an agent does.
Docs: mcp-interface, rules B-43, parity, testing (with the For-P12
paragraph), architecture, and the unit's As-built block.
Tests: drafts.rs (a_draft_waits_for_its_receipt_and_posts,
the_gate_moved_and_the_mcp_error_is_unchanged,
a_reversal_needs_no_receipt_of_its_own, discard_unblocks_the_close_over_the_wire,
report_warns_on_draft_before_as_of, cpa_package_refuses_open_draft,
stale_preview_refused, every_confirm_tool_takes_a_preview,
digest_since_seq_is_posting_time, legacy_reversed_replays_identically,
gui_and_server_gate_agree), attention_parity.rs, format_upgrade.rs.
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.
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