@insurance-broker/api-client 3.1.0 → 3.2.0

This diff represents the content of publicly available package versions that have been released to one of the supported registries. The information contained in this diff is provided for informational purposes only and reflects changes between package versions as they appear in their respective public registries.
Files changed (2) hide show
  1. package/dist/schema.d.ts +11 -2
  2. package/package.json +1 -1
package/dist/schema.d.ts CHANGED
@@ -3915,9 +3915,9 @@ export interface paths {
3915
3915
  *
3916
3916
  * **A payment posting does not do this** (ADR-0042 section 7). If it did, the platform would be asserting that cover began. A person looks at a payment and records that the requirement is discharged: the payment is the evidence, the person is the actor, and the platform is neither. There is no consumer, no sweep and no side effect that reaches this route.
3917
3917
  *
3918
- * **Only a policy in `pendingPayment` can be released, and only once.** Recording it against a policy no gate ever held would write an evidence trail for a requirement that never existed.
3918
+ * **Only a policy in `pendingPayment` can be released, and only once.** Recording it against a policy no gate ever held would write an evidence trail for a requirement that never existed; that is a `409`.
3919
3919
  *
3920
- * **The `paymentId` is recorded and not verified.** The payment lives in another module this one may not read (ADR-0002), so a mistyped identifier is a bad record rather than a refusal - issue #306 carries the contract that would check it.
3920
+ * **The `paymentId` must name an approved payment against a charge for this policy** (PAY-003, ADR-0042 section 7). A payment posts and settles its charge the moment it is recorded, but it releases cover only once a second person has approved it. Anything else is a `422` of type `urn:brokerplatform:problem:unusable-payment-evidence`, with one entry under `violations` whose `code` is `payment-not-this-policys` (no such payment in this broker's books, or one against another policy - deliberately the same answer), `payment-reversed`, or `payment-not-approved`.
3921
3921
  */
3922
3922
  post: operations["RecordPaymentRequirementMet"];
3923
3923
  delete?: never;
@@ -18084,6 +18084,15 @@ export interface operations {
18084
18084
  "application/problem+json": components["schemas"]["ProblemDetails"];
18085
18085
  };
18086
18086
  };
18087
+ /** @description Unprocessable Entity */
18088
+ 422: {
18089
+ headers: {
18090
+ [name: string]: unknown;
18091
+ };
18092
+ content: {
18093
+ "application/problem+json": components["schemas"]["ProblemDetails"];
18094
+ };
18095
+ };
18087
18096
  };
18088
18097
  };
18089
18098
  GetPolicy: {
package/package.json CHANGED
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
1
1
  {
2
2
  "name": "@insurance-broker/api-client",
3
- "version": "3.1.0",
3
+ "version": "3.2.0",
4
4
  "description": "Generated TypeScript client for the Insurance Broker Platform API. Do not edit by hand: regenerate with scripts/update-api-contract.",
5
5
  "license": "UNLICENSED",
6
6
  "private": false,