Max-testing pass, steps 2-4.
Spec-blind tests (rank 1-2): four agents, each given only the specs and
the public interface (doc comments and signatures, every body removed,
never src/ or the existing tests), wrote tests/spec_reports.rs (62),
spec_ledger.rs (72), spec_arap.rs (42), spec_assets_payroll.rs (50):
hand-computed examples per scenario and a proptest law per invariant
(conservation, partition, invariance, scaling, reversal cancels,
"a refusal leaves the books unchanged" over random invalid commands).
They found:
1. A refused payroll run changed the books: an all-zero run passed
validation, then failed at post after creating seven payroll
accounts and using up an entry id. validate_payroll_lines now
refuses a run with no gross pay.
2. A refused add_account used up an account id (empty code, duplicate,
unknown parent). The id is now taken only when the account is added.
3. Stale prose: close_period_to and members_equity still described the
old last-member rounding.
4. Open (left #[ignore]d pending Stephen): depreciation_schedule's doc
says "through the month containing" the date; the code prorates that
month by days.
GnuCash oracle (rank 3, an oracle never the spec): `just oracle` builds
GnuCash 5.10 in a container pinned by base digest and package versions
(oracle/gnucash/) and runs tests/oracle_gnucash.rs: 200 seeded random
books built through wanderbooks (entries, foreign lines, reversals,
monthly closes), every account's balance at month ends and random dates
and each month's P&L, compared exactly: 15,800 comparisons. First run:
4,724 differences, all from foreign lines; without them, zero.
Adjudicated from principles (rules.md B-3): wanderbooks booked
foreign * rate unrounded ($108.34567); a ledger in one money holds no
fractions of its smallest unit, and its cash must match a bank. Stephen
decided: book in the base currency's minor unit, half away from zero.
add_line_fx now rounds; minor units per ISO 4217 list one (2026-09-17,
SIX), generated into Currency::minor_units and recorded in
docs/spec/sources/iso-4217.md. Replay now takes the journaled base
amount (replay_add_line_fx), so lines booked before replay exactly as
booked (contract: books_written_under_older_rules_still_open). Now:
zero differences, foreign lines included.
Tests: 449, from 223.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01GWVo7x3UHw5kwCUaWxiejX
Three spec decisions from Stephen (2026-10-13), each test-first:
- A child account has its parent's type (ParentTypeMismatch): a child
subdivides its parent. Test: a_child_account_has_its_parents_type.
- Periods nest (a month in a quarter in a year) but never partially
overlap (PeriodsOverlap; a refusal uses no id). Test:
periods_nest_but_never_partially_overlap.
- A line's account must exist and take postings when the line is added,
not only at post (UnknownAccount / PlaceholderAccount from add_line
and add_line_fx); posting still re-checks. Two older tests that pinned
the post-time refusal now check both (the post-time check is reached
through the unchecked replay path, as old journals can).
Compatibility: replay reads history through new Ledger::replay_*
commands (add_account, add_line, add_line_fx, create_period) that skip
checks added later, so books written before these rules still open.
The contract test books_written_under_older_rules_still_open writes such
a journal directly and found, on its first run, that the SQLite
cross-check rebuild used the checked commands and would have failed
verification ("sqlite projection can't be read back"); it now replays
too. Documented in docs/spec/README.md; decisions recorded in rules.md
(B-1, B-4, B-12).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01GWVo7x3UHw5kwCUaWxiejX
Stephen (2026-10-13): when what wanderbooks knows is stale, check the
date, research it or ask the owner or CPA, and update the rule for
everyone with a pull request (best) or an issue (worst).
- ledger_core::rules: a registry of rules set by law that change over
time. Each says the years it's known for, its rules.md entry, its
vendored official source, and a review date. stale_rules(today) is
pure; the engine has no clock.
- The 1099 threshold is the first: $600 through 2025, $2,000 in 2026,
then indexed for inflation (26 U.S.C. §6041(h)). default_threshold
and vendor_1099_report now return Result; for 2027+ they refuse with
LedgerError::RuleNotKnown, whose message says what to do: get the
figure from the official source or the owner/CPA, pass it explicitly,
then open a PR (or issue) at github.com/swaits/wanderbooks. Before,
2027+ silently used $2,000.
- MCP: books.vendor_1099 relays that refusal; books.digest gains
stale_rules; the server instructions tell the agent the procedure (and
how to handle control-account conflicts: explain, never renumber).
The CPA package writes a NOT-INCLUDED note instead of a guessed 1099
worksheet.
- Viewer: "Needs attention" shows each stale rule with a ready prompt
for the agent; the 1099 page explains instead of guessing.
Review date for the 1099 rule: 2026-11-01, when the IRS usually
publishes next year's inflation adjustments (CONVENTION, marked as such
in the registry).
Tests: an_unknown_year_threshold_is_never_guessed,
dated_rules_go_stale_on_their_review_date (dates passed in, so no clock
in the test), MCP stdio: 2027 refused with guidance, explicit threshold
accepted, digest carries stale_rules (asserted date-independently).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01GWVo7x3UHw5kwCUaWxiejX
Stephen asked that specs come from recognized documents, not from
anyone's memory. There is no single US bookkeeping bible; authority is
layered, and this records it:
- docs/spec/sources/: verbatim excerpts (whitespace normalized), each
with URL, retrieval date, and the SHA-256 of the fetched file, of
public-domain texts: Pacioli's 1494 treatise in Geijsbeek's 1914
translation (double entry, the trial balance, one money, write only
forward, correct by opposite entry, close into capital); IRS Pub. 583,
538, 946, 15; the 1099-MISC/NEC instructions (2025 and 2026); 26 U.S.C.
§6041, §6041A, §704; Treas. Reg. §1.263(a)-1(f) and -4(f); Notice
2015-82; Rev. Proc. 98-25; Form 1065 instructions; 17 U.S.C. §105. The
excerpts were extracted by matching each passage against the fetched
file, so none can contain text the source doesn't.
- docs/spec/rules.md: the rule catalog, B-1 to B-22. Each rule says
AUTHORITY, CONVENTION, or DECISION; cites its sources (FASB's
Codification and Concepts Statement 8 and OpenStax quoted briefly,
never copied: copyright and CC BY-NC-SA); and names the code that
enforces it and the tests and proofs that check it.
- Spec blocks in the code now carry SOURCE: lines into the catalog;
AGENTS.md makes sourcing rule 0 of the formal-methods bar.
Corrections the sources turned up: the de minimis limit is $500 in the
regulation and $2,500 by Notice 2015-82 (both now cited); 1099
thresholds after 2026 are inflation-indexed, so the engine's flat
$2,000 for 2027+ is an open question (B-19). Unverified ASC paragraphs
(360-10-35-4, 340-10, 230-10-45-10, 606-10-55-37B, 210) are listed in
docs/spec/README.md until someone with a FASB basic-view login reads
them.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01GWVo7x3UHw5kwCUaWxiejX
swaitsandClaude Opus 5.5