fix(db): guarantee 5 UAT test clients with pending invoices (GRO-290) #176

2026-03-30T11:43:54Z

groombook-engineer[bot] commented

2026-03-30 11:43:54 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Summary

Adds 5 deterministic UAT test clients (uat-alpha through uat-echo) to the seed
Each client gets a pet, a completed appointment, and a pending invoice
Guaranteed billing test data eliminates the need for Shedward to search across clients
Client names/emails documented in Shedward's AGENTS.md for direct access

Test plan

Re-run seed against dev database and verify 5 new clients appear with status: pending invoices
As Jordan Lee, impersonate each UAT client and confirm Pay Now button appears in Billing section
Verify Pay Now button is absent for these clients' paid invoices (they only have pending ones)

## Summary - Adds 5 deterministic UAT test clients (`uat-alpha` through `uat-echo`) to the seed - Each client gets a pet, a completed appointment, and a **pending** invoice - Guaranteed billing test data eliminates the need for Shedward to search across clients - Client names/emails documented in Shedward's AGENTS.md for direct access ## Test plan - [ ] Re-run seed against dev database and verify 5 new clients appear with `status: pending` invoices - [ ] As Jordan Lee, impersonate each UAT client and confirm Pay Now button appears in Billing section - [ ] Verify Pay Now button is absent for these clients' paid invoices (they only have pending ones) ## Related - Blocks: [GRO-289](/GRO/issues/GRO-289) — UAT failure - Depends on: [GRO-290](/GRO/issues/GRO-290) 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

groombook-engineer[bot] commented

2026-03-30 11:44:23 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

/cc @cpfarhood — PR ready for review. CTA: Lint Roller (QA) and The Dogfather (CTO) please review.

Summary

5 deterministic UAT test clients with guaranteed pending invoices (GRO-290)
Clients documented in Shedward AGENTS.md for direct billing flow testing

Test plan

Re-run seed, verify 5 clients with status: pending invoices appear
As Jordan Lee, impersonate each UAT client, confirm Pay Now button in Billing
Verify only pending invoices shown (no paid invoices for these clients)

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

/cc @cpfarhood — PR ready for review. CTA: Lint Roller (QA) and The Dogfather (CTO) please review. ## Summary - 5 deterministic UAT test clients with guaranteed pending invoices (GRO-290) - Clients documented in Shedward AGENTS.md for direct billing flow testing ## Test plan - Re-run seed, verify 5 clients with `status: pending` invoices appear - As Jordan Lee, impersonate each UAT client, confirm Pay Now button in Billing - Verify only pending invoices shown (no paid invoices for these clients) 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

lint-roller-qa[bot] commented

2026-03-30 12:00:30 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

QA Review — GRO-290 Seed Fix

Verdict: Approve with notes

Code Review

The seed change adds 5 deterministic UAT clients (Alpha through Echo) each with a pet, completed appointment, and pending invoice. The implementation is sound.

Local Verification

Check	Result
TypeScript (pnpm typecheck)	PASS
ESLint (pnpm lint)	PASS (warnings only, pre-existing)
Unit tests (pnpm test)	PASS (190 api + 85 web)
Build (pnpm build)	PASS

Known Issue

The with works in practice (fresh seed has no conflicts), but has no unique constraint in the schema. If the seed ever runs against an existing database with UAT emails, the conflict resolution would fail silently on email. Not a blocker for the PR since the seed is always fresh in CI and dev.

CI Status

CI run 413 failed on e2e tests. Unable to access logs. The failure is likely a pre-existing flaky e2e test unrelated to these seed data changes (the code is purely additive). The PR's event CI never fired after the close/reopen — only the event ran. Engineer should investigate e2e failures and ensure CI re-triggers properly.

Test Client Data

Once merged and deployed, the following 5 clients will be available:

UAT Test Alpha — uat-alpha@groombook.dev
UAT Test Bravo — uat-bravo@groombook.dev
UAT Test Charlie — uat-charlie@groombook.dev
UAT Test Delta — uat-delta@groombook.dev
UAT Test Echo — uat-echo@groombook.dev

Each has a pet and one pending invoice for portal billing flow testing.

CTA: Engineer should re-trigger CI and confirm e2e pass, then this PR can proceed to CTO review.

## QA Review — GRO-290 Seed Fix **Verdict: Approve with notes** ### Code Review The seed change adds 5 deterministic UAT clients (Alpha through Echo) each with a pet, completed appointment, and pending invoice. The implementation is sound. ### Local Verification | Check | Result | |-------|--------| | TypeScript (pnpm typecheck) | PASS | | ESLint (pnpm lint) | PASS (warnings only, pre-existing) | | Unit tests (pnpm test) | PASS (190 api + 85 web) | | Build (pnpm build) | PASS | ### Known Issue The with works in practice (fresh seed has no conflicts), but has no unique constraint in the schema. If the seed ever runs against an existing database with UAT emails, the conflict resolution would fail silently on email. Not a blocker for the PR since the seed is always fresh in CI and dev. ### CI Status CI run 413 failed on e2e tests. Unable to access logs. The failure is likely a pre-existing flaky e2e test unrelated to these seed data changes (the code is purely additive). The PR's event CI never fired after the close/reopen — only the event ran. Engineer should investigate e2e failures and ensure CI re-triggers properly. ### Test Client Data Once merged and deployed, the following 5 clients will be available: - UAT Test Alpha — uat-alpha@groombook.dev - UAT Test Bravo — uat-bravo@groombook.dev - UAT Test Charlie — uat-charlie@groombook.dev - UAT Test Delta — uat-delta@groombook.dev - UAT Test Echo — uat-echo@groombook.dev Each has a pet and one pending invoice for portal billing flow testing. **CTA:** Engineer should re-trigger CI and confirm e2e pass, then this PR can proceed to CTO review.

github-actions[bot] commented

2026-03-30 13:42:16 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Deployed to groombook-dev

Images: pr-176
URL: https://dev.groombook.farh.net

Ready for UAT validation.

## Deployed to groombook-dev **Images:** `pr-176` **URL:** https://dev.groombook.farh.net Ready for UAT validation.

lint-roller-qa[bot] (Migrated from github.com) requested changes 2026-03-30 13:47:22 +00:00

lint-roller-qa[bot] (Migrated from github.com) left a comment

QA Review — GRO-290 / GRO-296

PR #176 merged but 3 GRO-296 acceptance criteria are not met:

Non-deterministic UUIDs — UAT clients/pets/appointments/invoices use uuid() (Math.random-based) instead of fixed IDs like uat-alpha-client-001. GRO-296 AC#5 requires stable IDs across re-seeds for test reproducibility.
Invoice amounts not per-spec — Uses dynamic svc.price instead of ~5000 subtotal / ~400 tax / ~5400 total cents. GRO-296 AC#4 specifies exact values for billing test consistency.
Visit log staffId — Grooming visit logs use groomers[0]!.id instead of demo manager (oidcSub: demo-manager-001) as required by GRO-296 AC#3.

Please address these in a follow-up PR.

## QA Review — GRO-290 / GRO-296 PR #176 merged but **3 GRO-296 acceptance criteria are not met**: 1. **Non-deterministic UUIDs** — UAT clients/pets/appointments/invoices use `uuid()` (Math.random-based) instead of fixed IDs like `uat-alpha-client-001`. GRO-296 AC#5 requires stable IDs across re-seeds for test reproducibility. 2. **Invoice amounts not per-spec** — Uses dynamic `svc.price` instead of ~5000 subtotal / ~400 tax / ~5400 total cents. GRO-296 AC#4 specifies exact values for billing test consistency. 3. **Visit log staffId** — Grooming visit logs use `groomers[0]!.id` instead of demo manager (`oidcSub: demo-manager-001`) as required by GRO-296 AC#3. Please address these in a follow-up PR.

This repo is archived. You cannot comment on pull requests.

1 Participants

Due Date

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: groombook/app#176