wehub-resource-sync
219 lines
11 KiB
Bash
Executable File
219 lines
11 KiB
Bash
Executable File
#!/usr/bin/env bash
|
|
#
|
|
# verify-teachable-gate.sh — proves the teach-mode GATE → UNLOCK contract end to
|
|
# end against the BANKING demo's real REST routes. This is the BACKEND-INDEPENDENT
|
|
# proof: it exercises roles #1 (GATE), #2 (UNLOCK + DECOY + catalogue check) of
|
|
# the 5-role contract entirely over HTTP, with NO Intelligence stack required.
|
|
# (Roles #3 RECORDING / #4 AGENT FRAMING / #5 KNOWLEDGE BACKEND are proven
|
|
# separately — see the README "Verification" section for the fresh-agent learning
|
|
# proof that activates once the backend lands.)
|
|
#
|
|
# It demonstrates, in order:
|
|
# A. GATE — approving an over-policy-limit transaction is blocked (422
|
|
# OVER_POLICY_LIMIT, symptom-only: it names the problem, never
|
|
# the fix).
|
|
# B. UNLOCK — filing a JUSTIFYING policy exception (open → finalize → link)
|
|
# lifts the gate; the same approval now succeeds.
|
|
# C. DECOY — a NON-justifying catalogue code files fine but does NOT lift
|
|
# the gate; approval stays blocked (422).
|
|
# D. CATALOGUE — an INVALID code is rejected (422 INVALID_EXCEPTION_CODE)
|
|
# WITHOUT the response enumerating the valid catalogue.
|
|
#
|
|
# USAGE
|
|
# ./verify-teachable-gate.sh # against http://localhost:3939
|
|
# BASE_URL=http://localhost:3000 ./verify-teachable-gate.sh
|
|
# ./verify-teachable-gate.sh http://localhost:3000 # positional override
|
|
#
|
|
# PREREQUISITES
|
|
# - The banking demo running locally (its dev server, e.g. `pnpm dev`). NOTE:
|
|
# `next dev` defaults to :3000; this script defaults to :3939 to match the
|
|
# project convention — point BASE_URL at whatever port you actually serve.
|
|
# - `curl` and `jq` on PATH.
|
|
# - A FRESH server process (or one not yet mutated by a prior run). The store is
|
|
# in-memory and seeded from `src/data/seed.json`; restart the dev server to
|
|
# reset. Each scenario below uses a DIFFERENT seeded transaction so a single
|
|
# run does not need a reset between scenarios.
|
|
#
|
|
# SEED FACTS THIS SCRIPT RELIES ON (src/data/seed.json):
|
|
# - t-1 "Google Ads" amount -5000 policy Marketing (limit 5000, spent 500)
|
|
# → approve needs 500+5000=5500 > 5000 ⇒ OVER LIMIT (scenario A/B)
|
|
# - t-3 "Microsoft 365" amount -10000 policy Executive (limit 10000, spent 1000)
|
|
# → approve needs 1000+10000=11000 > 10000 ⇒ OVER LIMIT (scenario C)
|
|
# - t-2 "AWS" amount -15000 policy Engineering(limit 15000, spent 1500)
|
|
# → approve needs 1500+15000=16500 > 15000 ⇒ OVER LIMIT (scenario D)
|
|
#
|
|
# JUSTIFYING vs DECOY codes (src/app/api/v1/policy-exception-codes.ts):
|
|
# JUSTIFYING (lift the gate): EXC-BOARD-APPROVED, EXC-CONTRACTUAL-COMMITMENT,
|
|
# EXC-EMERGENCY-SPEND
|
|
# DECOY (filed for history, do NOT lift the gate): EXC-WILL-REIMBURSE, EXC-ONE-TIME
|
|
# INVALID (not in the catalogue at all): anything else, e.g. EXC-MADE-UP
|
|
#
|
|
set -euo pipefail
|
|
|
|
# --- Config ----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
BASE_URL="${1:-${BASE_URL:-http://localhost:3939}}"
|
|
API="${BASE_URL%/}/api/v1"
|
|
|
|
# Seeded over-limit transactions (one per scenario so they don't interfere).
|
|
TXN_GATE="t-1" # scenarios A + B
|
|
TXN_DECOY="t-3" # scenario C
|
|
TXN_INVALID="t-2" # scenario D
|
|
|
|
JUSTIFYING_CODE="EXC-BOARD-APPROVED" # lifts the gate (role #2 UNLOCK)
|
|
DECOY_CODE="EXC-WILL-REIMBURSE" # valid catalogue code, does NOT justify
|
|
INVALID_CODE="EXC-DEFINITELY-NOT-REAL" # not in the catalogue at all
|
|
|
|
# --- Pretty helpers --------------------------------------------------------
|
|
have() { command -v "$1" >/dev/null 2>&1; }
|
|
if ! have curl; then echo "ERROR: curl not found on PATH" >&2; exit 1; fi
|
|
if ! have jq; then echo "ERROR: jq not found on PATH (used to parse JSON)" >&2; exit 1; fi
|
|
|
|
PASS=0
|
|
FAIL=0
|
|
section() { printf '\n\033[1m== %s ==\033[0m\n' "$1"; }
|
|
ok() { printf ' \033[32mPASS\033[0m %s\n' "$1"; PASS=$((PASS+1)); }
|
|
bad() { printf ' \033[31mFAIL\033[0m %s\n' "$1"; FAIL=$((FAIL+1)); }
|
|
|
|
# status_of METHOD URL [JSON_BODY] -> prints HTTP status, stashes body in $BODY
|
|
BODY=""
|
|
status_of() {
|
|
local method="$1" url="$2" data="${3:-}"
|
|
local resp code
|
|
if [[ -n "$data" ]]; then
|
|
resp="$(curl -sS -o /tmp/tm_body.$$ -w '%{http_code}' \
|
|
-X "$method" "$url" \
|
|
-H 'content-type: application/json' \
|
|
-d "$data")"
|
|
else
|
|
resp="$(curl -sS -o /tmp/tm_body.$$ -w '%{http_code}' -X "$method" "$url")"
|
|
fi
|
|
code="$resp"
|
|
BODY="$(cat /tmp/tm_body.$$ 2>/dev/null || true)"
|
|
rm -f /tmp/tm_body.$$
|
|
printf '%s' "$code"
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
approve() { status_of PUT "$API/transactions/$1" '{"status":"approved"}'; }
|
|
open_exception() { status_of POST "$API/exceptions" "{\"transactionId\":\"$1\",\"code\":\"$2\"}"; }
|
|
finalize() { status_of POST "$API/exceptions/$1/finalize"; }
|
|
|
|
printf 'teach-mode gate→unlock verification\n'
|
|
printf 'BASE_URL = %s\n' "$BASE_URL"
|
|
|
|
# ===========================================================================
|
|
# Scenario A — GATE (role #1): approving an over-limit txn is blocked, 422,
|
|
# symptom-only. The error names the over-limit POLICY but NEVER the
|
|
# policy-exception path that would lift it.
|
|
# Route: PUT /api/v1/transactions/[id] (src/app/api/v1/transactions/[id]/route.ts)
|
|
# ===========================================================================
|
|
section "A. GATE — over-limit approval is blocked (role #1)"
|
|
code="$(approve "$TXN_GATE")"
|
|
if [[ "$code" == "422" && "$(jq -r '.error' <<<"$BODY")" == "OVER_POLICY_LIMIT" ]]; then
|
|
ok "approve $TXN_GATE → 422 OVER_POLICY_LIMIT"
|
|
else
|
|
bad "expected 422 OVER_POLICY_LIMIT, got HTTP $code body=$BODY"
|
|
fi
|
|
# Symptom-only invariant: the rejection must NOT leak the unlock recipe.
|
|
if grep -qiE 'exception|EXC-|finalize|override|knowledge' <<<"$BODY"; then
|
|
bad "GATE error leaked the fix (mentions the exception/unlock path): $BODY"
|
|
else
|
|
ok "GATE error is symptom-only (no mention of the exception/unlock recipe)"
|
|
fi
|
|
|
|
# ===========================================================================
|
|
# Scenario B — UNLOCK (role #2): file a JUSTIFYING exception, then approve.
|
|
# open → POST /api/v1/exceptions (src/app/api/v1/exceptions/route.ts)
|
|
# final → POST /api/v1/exceptions/[id]/finalize
|
|
# (src/app/api/v1/exceptions/[id]/finalize/route.ts)
|
|
# The finalize step auto-approves the exception AND links it to the
|
|
# transaction's activeExceptionId — which is what lifts the gate, but ONLY
|
|
# because the code is justifying (store.hasApprovedException + isJustifying).
|
|
# ===========================================================================
|
|
section "B. UNLOCK — justifying exception lifts the gate (role #2)"
|
|
code="$(open_exception "$TXN_GATE" "$JUSTIFYING_CODE")"
|
|
if [[ "$code" == "201" ]]; then
|
|
EXC_ID="$(jq -r '.id' <<<"$BODY")"
|
|
ok "open exception ($JUSTIFYING_CODE) on $TXN_GATE → 201 id=$EXC_ID"
|
|
else
|
|
bad "expected 201 opening exception, got HTTP $code body=$BODY"; EXC_ID=""
|
|
fi
|
|
|
|
if [[ -n "${EXC_ID:-}" ]]; then
|
|
code="$(finalize "$EXC_ID")"
|
|
if [[ "$code" == "200" && "$(jq -r '.status' <<<"$BODY")" == "approved" ]]; then
|
|
ok "finalize $EXC_ID → 200 status=approved (linked to $TXN_GATE)"
|
|
else
|
|
bad "expected 200 approved finalizing, got HTTP $code body=$BODY"
|
|
fi
|
|
fi
|
|
|
|
# The payoff: the SAME approval that was blocked in A now succeeds.
|
|
code="$(approve "$TXN_GATE")"
|
|
if [[ "$code" == "201" ]]; then
|
|
ok "approve $TXN_GATE again → 201 (gate lifted by justifying exception)"
|
|
else
|
|
bad "expected 201 after justifying unlock, got HTTP $code body=$BODY"
|
|
fi
|
|
|
|
# ===========================================================================
|
|
# Scenario C — DECOY (role #2 invariant): a NON-justifying catalogue code is a
|
|
# valid code (files + finalizes fine, recorded for history) but does NOT lift
|
|
# the gate. Approval must stay 422. This is what forces the agent to LEARN
|
|
# WHICH codes justify — it can file every code and still fail.
|
|
# ===========================================================================
|
|
section "C. DECOY — non-justifying code files but does NOT unlock (role #2)"
|
|
code="$(open_exception "$TXN_DECOY" "$DECOY_CODE")"
|
|
if [[ "$code" == "201" ]]; then
|
|
DECOY_ID="$(jq -r '.id' <<<"$BODY")"
|
|
ok "open exception ($DECOY_CODE) on $TXN_DECOY → 201 id=$DECOY_ID (accepted: valid code)"
|
|
else
|
|
bad "expected 201 opening decoy exception, got HTTP $code body=$BODY"; DECOY_ID=""
|
|
fi
|
|
|
|
if [[ -n "${DECOY_ID:-}" ]]; then
|
|
code="$(finalize "$DECOY_ID")"
|
|
if [[ "$code" == "200" ]]; then
|
|
ok "finalize $DECOY_ID → 200 (filed for history)"
|
|
else
|
|
bad "expected 200 finalizing decoy, got HTTP $code body=$BODY"
|
|
fi
|
|
fi
|
|
|
|
code="$(approve "$TXN_DECOY")"
|
|
if [[ "$code" == "422" && "$(jq -r '.error' <<<"$BODY")" == "OVER_POLICY_LIMIT" ]]; then
|
|
ok "approve $TXN_DECOY → 422 OVER_POLICY_LIMIT (decoy did NOT lift the gate)"
|
|
else
|
|
bad "expected 422 OVER_POLICY_LIMIT (decoy must not unlock), got HTTP $code body=$BODY"
|
|
fi
|
|
|
|
# ===========================================================================
|
|
# Scenario D — CATALOGUE CHECK (role #2 invariant): an INVALID code is rejected
|
|
# (422 INVALID_EXCEPTION_CODE) WITHOUT enumerating the valid catalogue. Leaking
|
|
# the list would itself be a hint; the agent must discover the catalogue via
|
|
# /knowledge. Rejection happens at open time, so nothing to finalize/approve.
|
|
# ===========================================================================
|
|
section "D. CATALOGUE — invalid code rejected without leaking the list (role #2)"
|
|
code="$(open_exception "$TXN_INVALID" "$INVALID_CODE")"
|
|
if [[ "$code" == "422" && "$(jq -r '.error' <<<"$BODY")" == "INVALID_EXCEPTION_CODE" ]]; then
|
|
ok "open exception ($INVALID_CODE) → 422 INVALID_EXCEPTION_CODE"
|
|
else
|
|
bad "expected 422 INVALID_EXCEPTION_CODE, got HTTP $code body=$BODY"
|
|
fi
|
|
# Non-enumeration invariant: the rejection must not list any real catalogue codes.
|
|
if grep -qE 'EXC-BOARD-APPROVED|EXC-CONTRACTUAL-COMMITMENT|EXC-EMERGENCY-SPEND|EXC-WILL-REIMBURSE|EXC-ONE-TIME' <<<"$BODY"; then
|
|
bad "INVALID_EXCEPTION_CODE response leaked catalogue codes: $BODY"
|
|
else
|
|
ok "rejection does not enumerate the catalogue (no valid codes leaked)"
|
|
fi
|
|
|
|
# --- Summary ---------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
section "Summary"
|
|
printf ' passed: %d failed: %d\n' "$PASS" "$FAIL"
|
|
if [[ "$FAIL" -gt 0 ]]; then
|
|
printf '\n\033[31mGATE→UNLOCK contract NOT satisfied.\033[0m If failures are 404s or\n'
|
|
printf 'unexpected 201s on scenario A/C, you are likely re-running against a server\n'
|
|
printf 'whose store was already mutated — restart the dev server to reseed.\n'
|
|
exit 1
|
|
fi
|
|
printf '\n\033[32mGATE→UNLOCK contract verified (roles #1 and #2).\033[0m\n'
|