@lombard.finance/sdk 4.0.0 → 4.1.2

package/src/__tests__/unit/btc/ExistingSignatureHandling.test.ts

@@ -1,301 +0,0 @@
-/**
- * Existing Signature Handling Tests
- *
- * Tests for Bug #3 (BTC Stake active signature error) and
- * Bug #7 (Stake & Bake signature check).
- *
- * These tests verify the SDK handles existing deposits/signatures gracefully:
- * 1. Resuming from existing deposit addresses
- * 2. Handling API errors for duplicate signatures
- * 3. Proper error messages for users
- *
- * @module __tests__/unit/btc/ExistingSignatureHandling.test.ts
- */
-
-import { beforeEach, describe, expect, it, vi } from 'vitest';
-
-import { BaseBtcAction, type StatusConfig, type StepDefinition } from '../../../chains/btc/actions/shared/BaseBtcAction';
-import { PartnerConfiguration } from '../../../client/PartnerConfiguration';
-import { ChainId } from '../../../common/chains';
-import { Chain, Env, StepStatus } from '../../../core';
-import type { BtcCoreContext } from '../../../shared/context';
-import { evmAddressSchema } from '../../../shared/validation';
-
-// Mock context factory
-const createMockContext = (overrides: Partial<BtcCoreContext> = {}): BtcCoreContext => ({
-  env: Env.testnet,
-  btc: {} as BtcCoreContext['btc'],
-  api: {
-    generateDepositAddress: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue('tb1qexampleaddress'),
-    getDepositAddress: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue(null),
-    getFeeSignature: vi.fn(),
-    storeFeeSignature: vi.fn(),
-    getStakeAndBakeSignature: vi.fn(),
-    storeStakeAndBakeSignature: vi.fn(),
-    getDeposits: vi.fn(),
-  } as BtcCoreContext['api'],
-  partner: new PartnerConfiguration({ partnerId: 'test-partner' }),
-  capabilities: {
-    require: vi.fn(),
-    get: vi.fn(),
-    services: new Map(),
-    registerModule: vi.fn(),
-    hasModule: vi.fn().mockReturnValue(true),
-    modules: [],
-    shared: [],
-    config: {},
-    optional: [],
-    createContext: vi.fn(),
-  } as unknown as BtcCoreContext['capabilities'],
-  getProvider: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({
-    on: vi.fn(),
-    removeListener: vi.fn(),
-    request: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue('0x1'),
-  }),
-  ...overrides,
-});
-
-// Test implementation of BaseBtcAction
-// eslint-disable-next-line @typescript-eslint/no-explicit-any -- Test mock with generic step definition
-class TestBtcAction extends BaseBtcAction<any, string, { destChain: Chain }> {
-  private chainId: ChainId = ChainId.sepolia;
-
-  constructor(ctx: BtcCoreContext, params: { destChain: Chain }, initialStatus: string = 'idle') {
-    super(ctx, params, initialStatus);
-  }
-
-  protected getAddressSchema() {
-    return evmAddressSchema;
-  }
-
-  protected getStatusConfig(): StatusConfig<string> {
-    return {
-      idle: 'idle',
-      ready: 'ready',
-      addressReady: 'address_ready',
-    };
-  }
-
-  protected getInitialSteps(): StepDefinition {
-    return {
-      created: StepStatus.IDLE,
-      verifying: StepStatus.IDLE,
-    };
-  }
-
-  protected isAuthorized(): boolean {
-    return true;
-  }
-
-  protected getChainId(): ChainId {
-    return this.chainId;
-  }
-
-  protected getDepositAddressParams() {
-    return {
-      address: '0x742d35Cc6634C0532925a3b844Bc9e7595f0bEb0',
-      chainId: this.chainId,
-      signature: '0xsignature',
-      token: 'LBTC',
-      partnerId: 'test-partner',
-    };
-  }
-
-  protected getExpectedToken(): string {
-    return 'LBTC';
-  }
-
-  protected getAuthRequiredMessage(): string {
-    return 'Authorization required';
-  }
-
-  // Expose protected method for testing
-  public async testResumeFromExisting(recipient: string): Promise<boolean> {
-    return this.resumeFromExistingDeposit(recipient);
-  }
-
-  // Expose deposit address for assertions
-  public getDepositAddr(): string | undefined {
-    return this._depositAddress;
-  }
-}
-
-describe('Existing Signature/Deposit Handling (Bug #3 & #7)', () => {
-  let mockCtx: BtcCoreContext;
-
-  beforeEach(() => {
-    vi.clearAllMocks();
-    mockCtx = createMockContext();
-  });
-
-  describe('Resume from existing deposit (Bug #3 - partial fix)', () => {
-    it('should resume when existing deposit address found', async () => {
-      // Mock API to return existing deposit address
-      const existingAddress = 'tb1qexistingdeposit';
-      mockCtx.api.getDepositAddress = vi.fn().mockResolvedValue(existingAddress);
-
-      const action = new TestBtcAction(mockCtx, { destChain: Chain.SEPOLIA }, 'idle');
-      const recipient = '0x742d35Cc6634C0532925a3b844Bc9e7595f0bEb0';
-
-      const resumed = await action.testResumeFromExisting(recipient);
-
-      expect(resumed).toBe(true);
-      expect(action.getDepositAddr()).toBe(existingAddress);
-      // Note: resumeFromExistingDeposit no longer updates status
-      // The caller (prepare()) is responsible for setting status after fee auth check
-      expect(action.status).toBe('idle');
-    });
-
-    it('should NOT resume when no existing deposit', async () => {
-      // Mock API to return null (no existing deposit)
-      mockCtx.api.getDepositAddress = vi.fn().mockResolvedValue(null);
-
-      const action = new TestBtcAction(mockCtx, { destChain: Chain.SEPOLIA }, 'idle');
-      const recipient = '0x742d35Cc6634C0532925a3b844Bc9e7595f0bEb0';
-
-      const resumed = await action.testResumeFromExisting(recipient);
-
-      expect(resumed).toBe(false);
-      expect(action.getDepositAddr()).toBeUndefined();
-      expect(action.status).toBe('idle'); // Status unchanged
-    });
-
-    it('should NOT resume when API throws error', async () => {
-      // Mock API to throw (e.g., network error)
-      mockCtx.api.getDepositAddress = vi.fn().mockRejectedValue(new Error('Network error'));
-
-      const action = new TestBtcAction(mockCtx, { destChain: Chain.SEPOLIA }, 'idle');
-      const recipient = '0x742d35Cc6634C0532925a3b844Bc9e7595f0bEb0';
-
-      const resumed = await action.testResumeFromExisting(recipient);
-
-      expect(resumed).toBe(false);
-      expect(action.status).toBe('idle'); // Status unchanged, error swallowed
-    });
-
-    it('should call API with correct parameters', async () => {
-      mockCtx.api.getDepositAddress = vi.fn().mockResolvedValue(null);
-
-      const action = new TestBtcAction(mockCtx, { destChain: Chain.SEPOLIA }, 'idle');
-      const recipient = '0x742d35Cc6634C0532925a3b844Bc9e7595f0bEb0';
-
-      await action.testResumeFromExisting(recipient);
-
-      expect(mockCtx.api.getDepositAddress).toHaveBeenCalledWith({
-        address: recipient,
-        chainId: 11155111, // Sepolia chain ID
-        token: 'LBTC',
-        partnerId: 'test-partner',
-      });
-    });
-  });
-
-  describe('API Error Messages (for user-facing errors)', () => {
-    /**
-     * These tests document expected API error messages that the SDK
-     * should handle gracefully or provide helpful error messages for.
-     */
-
-    it('should identify "active signature" errors', () => {
-      const errorPatterns = [
-        'active signature already exists for this user',
-        'signature already exists',
-        'existing stake found',
-        'pending stake already exists',
-      ];
-
-      // Helper to check if an error message matches expected patterns
-      const isActiveSignatureError = (message: string): boolean => {
-        const normalized = message.toLowerCase();
-        return errorPatterns.some(pattern => normalized.includes(pattern.toLowerCase()));
-      };
-
-      expect(isActiveSignatureError('Active signature already exists for this user')).toBe(true);
-      expect(isActiveSignatureError('Signature already exists for address 0x123')).toBe(true);
-      expect(isActiveSignatureError('Network timeout')).toBe(false);
-      expect(isActiveSignatureError('Invalid address')).toBe(false);
-    });
-
-    it('should provide enhanced error message for duplicate signature errors', () => {
-      // This tests the error enhancement logic that should be implemented
-      // in the SDK Demo or SDK itself
-      
-      const enhanceErrorMessage = (error: Error): string => {
-        const message = error.message.toLowerCase();
-        
-        if (message.includes('active signature') || message.includes('signature already exists')) {
-          return `You already have a pending stake. Please complete the existing flow using your deposit address, or wait for it to expire. You can check your pending stakes in the Deposit Addresses section.`;
-        }
-        
-        if (message.includes('stake and bake signature already exists')) {
-          return `You already have a pending stake-and-deploy signature. Please complete that flow first or wait for expiration.`;
-        }
-        
-        return error.message;
-      };
-
-      const originalError = new Error('Active signature already exists for this user');
-      const enhanced = enhanceErrorMessage(originalError);
-      
-      expect(enhanced).toContain('pending stake');
-      expect(enhanced).toContain('deposit address');
-    });
-  });
-
-  describe('Status transitions during resume', () => {
-    it('should NOT transition status when resuming (caller sets status after fee auth check)', async () => {
-      mockCtx.api.getDepositAddress = vi.fn().mockResolvedValue('tb1qexisting');
-
-      const action = new TestBtcAction(mockCtx, { destChain: Chain.SEPOLIA }, 'idle');
-      const statusHistory: string[] = [];
-      
-      action.on('status-change', (status: string) => {
-        statusHistory.push(status);
-      });
-
-      await action.testResumeFromExisting('0x742d35Cc6634C0532925a3b844Bc9e7595f0bEb0');
-
-      // resumeFromExistingDeposit no longer emits status changes
-      // The caller (prepare()) sets status after validating fee auth
-      expect(statusHistory).not.toContain('address_ready');
-      expect(statusHistory).toHaveLength(0);
-    });
-
-    it('should NOT change status when no existing deposit', async () => {
-      mockCtx.api.getDepositAddress = vi.fn().mockResolvedValue(null);
-
-      const action = new TestBtcAction(mockCtx, { destChain: Chain.SEPOLIA }, 'idle');
-      const statusHistory: string[] = [];
-      
-      action.on('status-change', (status: string) => {
-        statusHistory.push(status);
-      });
-
-      await action.testResumeFromExisting('0x742d35Cc6634C0532925a3b844Bc9e7595f0bEb0');
-
-      expect(statusHistory).toEqual([]); // No status changes
-    });
-  });
-
-  describe('Edge cases', () => {
-    it('should handle undefined/null address from API', async () => {
-      mockCtx.api.getDepositAddress = vi.fn().mockResolvedValue(undefined);
-
-      const action = new TestBtcAction(mockCtx, { destChain: Chain.SEPOLIA }, 'idle');
-      const resumed = await action.testResumeFromExisting('0x742d35Cc6634C0532925a3b844Bc9e7595f0bEb0');
-
-      expect(resumed).toBe(false);
-    });
-
-    it('should handle empty string address from API', async () => {
-      mockCtx.api.getDepositAddress = vi.fn().mockResolvedValue('');
-
-      const action = new TestBtcAction(mockCtx, { destChain: Chain.SEPOLIA }, 'idle');
-      const resumed = await action.testResumeFromExisting('0x742d35Cc6634C0532925a3b844Bc9e7595f0bEb0');
-
-      // Empty string is falsy, so should not resume
-      expect(resumed).toBe(false);
-    });
-  });
-});
-

package/src/__tests__/unit/btc/StakeAndBakeRatioConversion.test.ts

@@ -1,200 +0,0 @@
-/**
- * Stake and Bake Ratio Conversion Tests
- *
- * Verifies that BtcStakeAndDeploy correctly passes 'BTC' as the token
- * to trigger the btcToLbtc ratio conversion in signStakeAndBake.
- *
- * Bug Reference: APP-1993
- * Problem: Signature contained raw BTC amount (20000) instead of
- * ratio-adjusted LBTC amount (19947), causing backend to reject deposit.
- *
- * Root Cause: BtcStakeAndDeploy passed `token: AssetId.LBTC` instead of
- * `token: 'BTC'`, which triggered 'identity' strategy instead of 'btcToLbtc'.
- *
- * @module __tests__/unit/btc/StakeAndBakeRatioConversion.test.ts
- */
-
-import BigNumber from 'bignumber.js';
-import { afterEach,beforeEach, describe, expect, it, vi } from 'vitest';
-
-import { DEFI_REGISTRY,DefiProtocol } from '../../../defi/defi-registry';
-import { Token } from '../../../tokens/token-addresses';
-
-// Mock the exchange ratio API
-vi.mock(
-  '../../../api-functions/getLBTCExchangeRate/get-exchange-ratio',
-  () => ({
-    getExchangeRatio: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({
-      LBTC: {
-        tokenBTCRatio: new BigNumber('0.99736'),
-        BTCTokenRatio: new BigNumber('1.00265'),
-      },
-    }),
-  }),
-);
-
-describe('Stake and Bake Ratio Conversion', () => {
-  beforeEach(() => {
-    vi.clearAllMocks();
-  });
-
-  afterEach(() => {
-    vi.restoreAllMocks();
-  });
-
-  describe('DEFI_REGISTRY Configuration', () => {
-    it('should have btcToLbtc strategy for BTC token in Veda protocol', () => {
-      // This ensures that when 'BTC' is passed as token, ratio conversion happens
-      const vedaRegistry = DEFI_REGISTRY[DefiProtocol.Veda];
-      expect(vedaRegistry).toBeDefined();
-
-      const btcStrategy = vedaRegistry['BTC'];
-      expect(btcStrategy).toBeDefined();
-      if (!btcStrategy) return;
-
-      // Check that at least one environment has btcToLbtc strategy
-      const envs = Object.values(btcStrategy);
-      const hasConversion = envs.some(envMap =>
-        envMap ? Object.values(envMap).some(
-          chainConfig => chainConfig?.amountStrategy === 'btcToLbtc',
-        ) : false,
-      );
-
-      expect(hasConversion).toBe(true);
-    });
-
-    it('should have identity strategy for LBTC token in Veda protocol', () => {
-      // This shows that passing LBTC as token does NOT trigger conversion
-      const vedaRegistry = DEFI_REGISTRY[DefiProtocol.Veda];
-      expect(vedaRegistry).toBeDefined();
-
-      const lbtcStrategy = vedaRegistry[Token.LBTC];
-      expect(lbtcStrategy).toBeDefined();
-      if (!lbtcStrategy) return;
-
-      // Check that LBTC uses identity strategy (no conversion)
-      const envs = Object.values(lbtcStrategy);
-      const hasIdentity = envs.some(envMap =>
-        envMap ? Object.values(envMap).some(
-          chainConfig => chainConfig?.amountStrategy === 'identity',
-        ) : false,
-      );
-
-      expect(hasIdentity).toBe(true);
-    });
-
-    it('should have identity strategy for BTCb token in Silo protocol', () => {
-      // BTCb in Silo uses identity - no conversion needed
-      const siloRegistry = DEFI_REGISTRY[DefiProtocol.Silo];
-      expect(siloRegistry).toBeDefined();
-
-      const btcbStrategy = siloRegistry[Token.BTCb];
-      expect(btcbStrategy).toBeDefined();
-      if (!btcbStrategy) return;
-
-      // Check that BTCb uses identity strategy
-      const envs = Object.values(btcbStrategy);
-      const hasIdentity = envs.some(envMap =>
-        envMap ? Object.values(envMap).some(
-          chainConfig => chainConfig?.amountStrategy === 'identity',
-        ) : false,
-      );
-
-      expect(hasIdentity).toBe(true);
-    });
-  });
-
-  describe('Ratio Conversion Logic', () => {
-    it('should calculate correct LBTC amount from BTC using ratio', async () => {
-      // Import the actual function to test the conversion logic
-      const { calculateStakeAndBakeLBTCAmount } = await import(
-        '../../../contract-functions/signStakeAndBake/utils'
-      );
-
-      // Test with example values from the bug report:
-      // User sends 20000 satoshis, ratio is ~1.00265
-      // Expected LBTC amount: 20000 / 1.00265 ≈ 19947
-      const btcAmount = new BigNumber(20000); // satoshis
-      const result = await calculateStakeAndBakeLBTCAmount(btcAmount);
-
-      // The result should be less than the input (due to ratio > 1)
-      expect(result.isLessThan(btcAmount)).toBe(true);
-
-      // With ratio 1.00265, 20000 / 1.00265 ≈ 19947.12
-      // Allow for small precision differences
-      expect(result.toFixed(0)).toBe('19947');
-    });
-
-    it('should return same amount when ratio is 1', async () => {
-      // Reset the mock to return ratio of 1
-      const { getExchangeRatio } = await import(
-        '../../../api-functions/getLBTCExchangeRate/get-exchange-ratio'
-      );
-      vi.mocked(getExchangeRatio).mockResolvedValueOnce({
-        LBTC: {
-          tokenBTCRatio: new BigNumber(1),
-          BTCTokenRatio: new BigNumber(1),
-        },
-      });
-
-      const { calculateStakeAndBakeLBTCAmount } = await import(
-        '../../../contract-functions/signStakeAndBake/utils'
-      );
-
-      const btcAmount = new BigNumber(20000);
-      const result = await calculateStakeAndBakeLBTCAmount(btcAmount);
-
-      expect(result.isEqualTo(btcAmount)).toBe(true);
-    });
-  });
-
-  describe('Token Parameter Selection', () => {
-    it('BtcStakeAndDeploy should use BTC token for authorizeStakeAndBake', () => {
-      /**
-       * This test documents the expected behavior:
-       *
-       * BtcStakeAndDeploy.authorizeDeposit() should call:
-       *   authorizeStakeAndBake({ ..., token: 'BTC' })
-       *
-       * NOT:
-       *   authorizeStakeAndBake({ ..., token: AssetId.LBTC })
-       *
-       * The 'BTC' token triggers 'btcToLbtc' amountStrategy which applies
-       * the ratio conversion before signing.
-       *
-       * This is critical because the backend expects the signature to contain
-       * the ratio-adjusted LBTC amount, not the raw BTC amount.
-       */
-
-      // Verify the registry is configured correctly for this use case
-      const vedaBtcConfig = DEFI_REGISTRY[DefiProtocol.Veda]?.['BTC'];
-      expect(vedaBtcConfig).toBeDefined();
-
-      // The fix ensures BtcStakeAndDeploy passes 'BTC' which hits this config
-      if (!vedaBtcConfig) return;
-      const firstEnv = Object.values(vedaBtcConfig)[0];
-      if (!firstEnv) return;
-      const firstChain = Object.values(firstEnv)[0];
-
-      expect(firstChain?.amountStrategy).toBe('btcToLbtc');
-    });
-
-    it('BtcDepositAndDeploy should use BTCb token (no conversion)', () => {
-      /**
-       * BtcDepositAndDeploy correctly uses Token.BTCb which has 'identity'
-       * strategy - no ratio conversion is needed for BTC.b deposits.
-       *
-       * This is correct because 1 BTC = 1 BTC.b (no exchange rate).
-       */
-      const siloBtcbConfig = DEFI_REGISTRY[DefiProtocol.Silo]?.[Token.BTCb];
-      expect(siloBtcbConfig).toBeDefined();
-      if (!siloBtcbConfig) return;
-
-      const firstEnv = Object.values(siloBtcbConfig)[0];
-      if (!firstEnv) return;
-      const firstChain = Object.values(firstEnv)[0];
-
-      expect(firstChain?.amountStrategy).toBe('identity');
-    });
-  });
-});