@nage-api/testing 1.0.0-beta.2

package/LICENSE

@@ -0,0 +1,202 @@
+
+                                 Apache License
+                           Version 2.0, January 2004
+                        http://www.apache.org/licenses/
+
+   TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR USE, REPRODUCTION, AND DISTRIBUTION
+
+   1. Definitions.
+
+      "License" shall mean the terms and conditions for use, reproduction,
+      and distribution as defined by Sections 1 through 9 of this document.
+
+      "Licensor" shall mean the copyright owner or entity authorized by
+      the copyright owner that is granting the License.
+
+      "Legal Entity" shall mean the union of the acting entity and all
+      other entities that control, are controlled by, or are under common
+      control with that entity. For the purposes of this definition,
+      "control" means (i) the power, direct or indirect, to cause the
+      direction or management of such entity, whether by contract or
+      otherwise, or (ii) ownership of fifty percent (50%) or more of the
+      outstanding shares, or (iii) beneficial ownership of such entity.
+
+      "You" (or "Your") shall mean an individual or Legal Entity
+      exercising permissions granted by this License.
+
+      "Source" form shall mean the preferred form for making modifications,
+      including but not limited to software source code, documentation
+      source, and configuration files.
+
+      "Object" form shall mean any form resulting from mechanical
+      transformation or translation of a Source form, including but
+      not limited to compiled object code, generated documentation,
+      and conversions to other media types.
+
+      "Work" shall mean the work of authorship, whether in Source or
+      Object form, made available under the License, as indicated by a
+      copyright notice that is included in or attached to the work
+      (an example is provided in the Appendix below).
+
+      "Derivative Works" shall mean any work, whether in Source or Object
+      form, that is based on (or derived from) the Work and for which the
+      editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications
+      represent, as a whole, an original work of authorship. For the purposes
+      of this License, Derivative Works shall not include works that remain
+      separable from, or merely link (or bind by name) to the interfaces of,
+      the Work and Derivative Works thereof.
+
+      "Contribution" shall mean any work of authorship, including
+      the original version of the Work and any modifications or additions
+      to that Work or Derivative Works thereof, that is intentionally
+      submitted to Licensor for inclusion in the Work by the copyright owner
+      or by an individual or Legal Entity authorized to submit on behalf of
+      the copyright owner. For the purposes of this definition, "submitted"
+      means any form of electronic, verbal, or written communication sent
+      to the Licensor or its representatives, including but not limited to
+      communication on electronic mailing lists, source code control systems,
+      and issue tracking systems that are managed by, or on behalf of, the
+      Licensor for the purpose of discussing and improving the Work, but
+      excluding communication that is conspicuously marked or otherwise
+      designated in writing by the copyright owner as "Not a Contribution."
+
+      "Contributor" shall mean Licensor and any individual or Legal Entity
+      on behalf of whom a Contribution has been received by Licensor and
+      subsequently incorporated within the Work.
+
+   2. Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions of
+      this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual,
+      worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
+      copyright license to reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of,
+      publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute the
+      Work and such Derivative Works in Source or Object form.
+
+   3. Grant of Patent License. Subject to the terms and conditions of
+      this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual,
+      worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
+      (except as stated in this section) patent license to make, have made,
+      use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer the Work,
+      where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable
+      by such Contributor that are necessarily infringed by their
+      Contribution(s) alone or by combination of their Contribution(s)
+      with the Work to which such Contribution(s) was submitted. If You
+      institute patent litigation against any entity (including a
+      cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the Work
+      or a Contribution incorporated within the Work constitutes direct
+      or contributory patent infringement, then any patent licenses
+      granted to You under this License for that Work shall terminate
+      as of the date such litigation is filed.
+
+   4. Redistribution. You may reproduce and distribute copies of the
+      Work or Derivative Works thereof in any medium, with or without
+      modifications, and in Source or Object form, provided that You
+      meet the following conditions:
+
+      (a) You must give any other recipients of the Work or
+          Derivative Works a copy of this License; and
+
+      (b) You must cause any modified files to carry prominent notices
+          stating that You changed the files; and
+
+      (c) You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works
+          that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and
+          attribution notices from the Source form of the Work,
+          excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of
+          the Derivative Works; and
+
+      (d) If the Work includes a "NOTICE" text file as part of its
+          distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must
+          include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained
+          within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not
+          pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one
+          of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed
+          as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or
+          documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or,
+          within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and
+          wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents
+          of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and
+          do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution
+          notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside
+          or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided
+          that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed
+          as modifying the License.
+
+      You may add Your own copyright statement to Your modifications and
+      may provide additional or different license terms and conditions
+      for use, reproduction, or distribution of Your modifications, or
+      for any such Derivative Works as a whole, provided Your use,
+      reproduction, and distribution of the Work otherwise complies with
+      the conditions stated in this License.
+
+   5. Submission of Contributions. Unless You explicitly state otherwise,
+      any Contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the Work
+      by You to the Licensor shall be under the terms and conditions of
+      this License, without any additional terms or conditions.
+      Notwithstanding the above, nothing herein shall supersede or modify
+      the terms of any separate license agreement you may have executed
+      with Licensor regarding such Contributions.
+
+   6. Trademarks. This License does not grant permission to use the trade
+      names, trademarks, service marks, or product names of the Licensor,
+      except as required for reasonable and customary use in describing the
+      origin of the Work and reproducing the content of the NOTICE file.
+
+   7. Disclaimer of Warranty. Unless required by applicable law or
+      agreed to in writing, Licensor provides the Work (and each
+      Contributor provides its Contributions) on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+      WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
+      implied, including, without limitation, any warranties or conditions
+      of TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, or FITNESS FOR A
+      PARTICULAR PURPOSE. You are solely responsible for determining the
+      appropriateness of using or redistributing the Work and assume any
+      risks associated with Your exercise of permissions under this License.
+
+   8. Limitation of Liability. In no event and under no legal theory,
+      whether in tort (including negligence), contract, or otherwise,
+      unless required by applicable law (such as deliberate and grossly
+      negligent acts) or agreed to in writing, shall any Contributor be
+      liable to You for damages, including any direct, indirect, special,
+      incidental, or consequential damages of any character arising as a
+      result of this License or out of the use or inability to use the
+      Work (including but not limited to damages for loss of goodwill,
+      work stoppage, computer failure or malfunction, or any and all
+      other commercial damages or losses), even if such Contributor
+      has been advised of the possibility of such damages.
+
+   9. Accepting Warranty or Additional Liability. While redistributing
+      the Work or Derivative Works thereof, You may choose to offer,
+      and charge a fee for, acceptance of support, warranty, indemnity,
+      or other liability obligations and/or rights consistent with this
+      License. However, in accepting such obligations, You may act only
+      on Your own behalf and on Your sole responsibility, not on behalf
+      of any other Contributor, and only if You agree to indemnify,
+      defend, and hold each Contributor harmless for any liability
+      incurred by, or claims asserted against, such Contributor by reason
+      of your accepting any such warranty or additional liability.
+
+   END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS
+
+   APPENDIX: How to apply the Apache License to your work.
+
+      To apply the Apache License to your work, attach the following
+      boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[]"
+      replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include
+      the brackets!)  The text should be enclosed in the appropriate
+      comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a
+      file or class name and description of purpose be included on the
+      same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier
+      identification within third-party archives.
+
+   Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner]
+
+   Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
+   you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
+   You may obtain a copy of the License at
+
+       http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+
+   Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
+   distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+   WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+   See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+   limitations under the License.

package/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,259 @@
+# @nage-api/testing
+
+The shared test kit (PLAN.md §19, §24 Phase 9).
+
+Depends on `@nage-api/contracts` and nothing else — no test runner, no driver, no
+Docker. That constraint is what makes it usable from every other package
+without creating a cycle, and it shapes most of the design decisions below.
+
+## What's in it
+
+|                         |                                                                                         |
+| ----------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
+| **Security packs**      | Cases a whole class of implementation must pass, parameterised over an injected harness |
+| **`expectNoSecrets`**   | The leak check, done properly: non-enumerable `Error` fields, encodings, cycles         |
+| **Fixtures**            | Deterministic builders — a suite cannot fail once a month at midnight                   |
+| **Port doubles**        | Real implementations of the framework's ports                                           |
+| **Envelope assertions** | The three things every e2e test asserts about a response                                |
+| **Container harness**   | Pinned images, retry, parallel-safe — and a clean skip with no Docker                   |
+
+## Security packs
+
+A pack is the case list, not the wiring. You supply a harness that knows how to
+drive your implementation; the pack supplies the attacks.
+
+```ts
+import { describeQueryAllowList, type TestApi } from '@nage-api/testing';
+import { afterEach, beforeEach, describe, expect, it } from 'vitest';
+
+import { parseQuery } from '@nage-api/data';
+import { policy } from './widget.policy.js';
+
+// The injected runner — see "Why the runner is injected" below.
+const api: TestApi = { describe, it, beforeEach, afterEach, expect };
+
+describeQueryAllowList(api, {
+  name: 'parseQuery',
+  parse: (query) => parseQuery(query, policy),
+  forbiddenField: 'cost_price',
+  allowedField: 'name',
+  maxLimit: 50,
+  allowedOperators: ['eq', 'gt'],
+  // Only operators the policy really refuses. `ne` is in `DEFAULT_OPERATORS`, so
+  // listing it here against a policy that does not narrow `operators` fails the
+  // case — and the failure is the pack's, not the parser's.
+  forbiddenOperators: ['regexp', '$where'],
+});
+```
+
+The four packs:
+
+- **`describeQueryAllowList`** — a forbidden field at the top level, nested in
+  `and`/`or`, and nested twice; `limit: -1`, above the ceiling, _at_ the ceiling
+  (must pass), non-numeric; a negative offset; `__proto__` and `constructor` as
+  keys; each allowed and forbidden operator.
+- **`describeAuthzBypass`** — no credential, the wrong grant, empty roles and
+  permissions, and look-alike grants that differ only by case, substring or
+  whitespace. Also asserts a refusal names neither the missing grant nor the
+  target, since a precise "403 you lack `billing:admin` on invoice 41" is an
+  enumeration oracle.
+
+  The look-alike cases substitute into the **authorised** principal, not the
+  unauthorised one. It reads backwards until you try it the other way: a guard
+  that also consults a store refuses an unauthorised id on the store check, never
+  reaches the grant comparison, and passes the case while still granting `admin`
+  to a stored principal whose role is `administrator-readonly`. Conversely, a
+  surface that re-derives grants from a store — a resolver in front of a guard —
+  cannot be attacked through the credential at all; the pack detects that shape
+  by stripping the grants first, and covers it with `forgedClaims` instead.
+
+- **`describeUploadValidation`** — the nine files in `MALICIOUS_UPLOADS`: PHP
+  bytes behind a `.png` name, a double extension, an SVG, HTML behind
+  `image/png`, an empty file, a traversal filename, a name whose real extension
+  hides behind a separator, a truncated magic number, and a type outside the
+  allow-list. Then JPEG bytes declared as `image/png`, and `shell.PHP` in capitals
+  for a denied-extension check written case-sensitively. Plus a control case,
+  because a validator that refuses everything passes an all-negative suite.
+- **`describeErrorNonLeakage`** — the operator detail, error metadata and cause
+  chain must not reach the client; a non-empty safe message and a stable code
+  must. Given `toLogRecord`, it also asserts the operator _does_ get the detail —
+  redaction that eats the diagnostic is its own defect.
+
+Every pack includes at least one case that must **pass**. An assertion suite
+made only of refusals is satisfied by an implementation that refuses everything.
+
+### Why the runner is injected
+
+The framework standardises on Vitest; generated apps may use Jest (§27.3). A
+pack that imported `vitest` would be unusable in a Jest suite and would put a
+runner in this package's dependencies. So the runner arrives as a `TestApi` — five
+members: `describe`, `it`, `beforeEach`, `afterEach` and an `expect` returning the
+small `Expectation` matcher surface the packs use.
+
+Vitest's and Jest's real APIs both satisfy that structurally, so the whole adapter
+is one object literal:
+
+```ts
+import { afterEach, beforeEach, describe, expect, it } from 'vitest';
+import type { TestApi } from '@nage-api/testing';
+
+export const api: TestApi = { describe, it, beforeEach, afterEach, expect };
+```
+
+Pass all five, since a pack is free to use the hooks even if today's ones mostly
+do not. Declaring the constant as `TestApi` rather than passing the literal inline
+is worth the extra line: the assignment is where a runner that has drifted from
+the interface is reported, at the file that owns the adapter rather than at every
+pack call.
+
+## `expectNoSecrets`
+
+The same defect appears in every package: a password in a validation error, a
+connection string in a health response, a token in a log line. The obvious check
+misses it three ways:
+
+```ts
+import { expect } from 'vitest';
+
+declare const error: Error;
+declare const password: string;
+
+expect(JSON.stringify(error)).not.toContain(password); // passes on a leak
+```
+
+- **Non-enumerable fields.** `Error.message`, `Error.stack` and `cause` do not
+  survive a JSON round trip — exactly the fields most likely to hold the leak.
+- **Encodings.** A secret survives as base64, base64url or URL-encoded text.
+- **Cycles.** A serialiser that throws on a cyclic object turns a security
+  assertion into an unrelated failure, and the leak goes unchecked.
+
+```ts
+import { RecordingLogger, expectNoSecrets } from '@nage-api/testing';
+
+// The response the test just made, and the credentials it was built from.
+declare const response: { body: unknown };
+declare const password: string;
+declare const refreshToken: string;
+declare const logger: RecordingLogger;
+
+expectNoSecrets(response.body, [password, refreshToken], 'client payload');
+expectNoSecrets(logger.entries, [password], 'log');
+```
+
+The failure message masks what it found — via the exported `mask()` — including
+the excerpt of scanned text. A CI log is where secrets go to live forever, and a
+_failing_ leak assertion must not be the thing that puts one there.
+
+## Fixtures
+
+Deterministic, and counter-based rather than stateful-random: `hash32(seed,
+index)` means inserting a fixture at the top of a suite does not renumber every
+id below it, so a diff stays readable.
+
+```ts
+import { authUser, fixtureDate, fixtures, paginated } from '@nage-api/testing';
+
+declare const records: readonly { readonly id: string }[];
+
+const user = authUser({ roles: ['editor'] }); // overrides say what the test is about
+const page = paginated(records); // count derived from the records
+const oneMinuteIn = fixtureDate(60_000); // fixed epoch + offset
+const scoped = fixtures(7); // an independent sequence per suite
+```
+
+Dates are anchored to `FIXTURE_EPOCH_MS`, so no test depends on the wall clock.
+Emails use `example.test` (RFC 2606), so a fixture can never send real mail.
+`paginated` derives `count` from the records it was given: a fixture that
+accepted a blind count could describe an impossible page, and a test asserting
+on pagination would be asserting on the lie.
+
+## Port doubles
+
+`FakeClock`, `RecordingLogger`, `MemoryKeyValueStore`, `MemoryRateLimitStore`,
+`StubSecretProvider`. Mocked at the **port** boundary, never at ORM internals
+(§19).
+
+Each is a complete implementation, not a stub that returns `undefined`. That
+distinction is the point: a stub agrees with whatever the code under test does,
+so a test built on one passes even when the code is wrong. `MemoryRateLimitStore`
+is a real fixed-window counter that actually refuses — a guard tested against a
+permissive double is a guard nobody has tested. `StubSecretProvider.require`
+rejects for a missing name, exactly as the env and AWS providers do.
+
+`RecordingLogger.child()` shares its parent's `entries` array, so a test can
+assert nothing in the whole logger tree leaked a credential without having to
+know which children the code created.
+
+## Container harness
+
+`testcontainers` is **not** a dependency — this package must stay installable
+without Docker. The runtime is a port:
+
+<!-- docs-example: fragment -->
+
+```ts
+import { describe, it } from 'vitest';
+import { ContainerHarness, describeWithContainers, type ContainerRuntime } from '@nage-api/testing';
+
+// The adapter over `testcontainers` — or over anything else that starts a
+// container — that the project supplies. `unavailableRuntime` is the default.
+declare const dockerRuntime: ContainerRuntime;
+
+const harness = new ContainerHarness({ runtime: dockerRuntime });
+
+await describeWithContainers(
+  { describe, it },
+  {
+    name: 'postgres driver conformance',
+    harness,
+    suite: () => {
+      /* … */
+    },
+  },
+);
+```
+
+Three mitigations for the flakiness §24 names, all structural rather than
+remembered: images are pinned to exact patch versions in `IMAGES` (a floating
+`postgres:16` is a different image next month); `start` retries with exponential
+backoff; and every container gets a process-wide unique name plus an ephemeral
+port, so two suites running at once cannot collide.
+
+Without a runtime the suite skips **loudly** — the suite title says it skipped
+and why, and it leaves a passing marker test behind, because a silently skipped
+suite is indistinguishable from a passing one. `required: true` turns the skip
+into a failure, for the CI job that is supposed to have Docker.
+
+## Two deliberate deviations from §19
+
+**No in-memory repository.** §19 lists an in-memory driver as part of this
+package. `@nage-api/data` already ships `MemoryRepository`, and it is the one the
+driver conformance suite runs against — so it is the only in-memory repository
+whose behaviour is _proven_ to match a real driver's. A second copy here would
+have no such guarantee, and this package sits below `@nage-api/data` in the
+dependency graph and may not import it. Use `MemoryRepository` from `@nage-api/data`.
+
+**The container adapter has never been exercised against Docker.** There is no
+container runtime in this development environment. `ContainerHarness` is
+unit-tested against a fake runtime — retry, backoff, naming, teardown, the skip
+and the required-failure paths are all covered — but no test in this repository
+has started a real container. The first project to supply a `testcontainers`
+adapter is exercising that path for the first time.
+
+## Testing the kit
+
+174 tests, and the most valuable of them are in `test/packs.spec.ts`, which runs
+every pack twice: against a compliant subject, where each case must pass, and
+against subjects broken in one named way each, where the pack must fail **on the
+case that names the defect**. A pack that quietly passes a broken implementation
+is worse than no pack, because it produces a green suite as evidence — and only
+this kind of test can tell the two apart. It is also what proves each case is not
+decorative: the off-by-one-ceiling subject exists to show why the pack asserts
+that a limit _at_ the maximum is accepted, and the refuses-everything subject
+exists to show why every pack needs a control case.
+
+The suite has caught three real defects in the kit's own code so far:
+`expectNoSecrets` printing the raw secret into its own failure message,
+`ContainerHarness` handing two containers the same name when both started inside
+one millisecond, and the authorization pack's look-alike cases passing for the
+wrong reason against any store-backed guard.

package/dist/assertions/envelope.d.ts

@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
+/**
+ * Assertions about the response envelope (PLAN.md §16.1, §19).
+ *
+ * Every e2e test in every package makes the same three assertions about a
+ * response — that it is an envelope, that it carries the correlation id, and
+ * that an error's `code` is the stable one. Writing them by hand each time is
+ * how a test ends up asserting `response.body.data` exists while quietly
+ * accepting `success: false`.
+ *
+ * These throw plain `Error`s, so they work in any runner and inside a pack.
+ *
+ * The input is a real HTTP body, so it is modelled as one: `LooseEnvelope`
+ * describes what *might* be there rather than what should be. Casting straight to
+ * `ApiResponse` would make the checks below look redundant to the type checker
+ * while remaining exactly as necessary at runtime — the assertion would then be
+ * "the cast said so", which is no assertion at all.
+ */
+import type { ErrorCode, ErrorResponse } from '@nage-api/contracts';
+/**
+ * Narrow a body to a success envelope, or throw with what it actually was.
+ *
+ * @returns the `data` member, so a caller can chain straight into assertions
+ */
+export declare function assertSuccessEnvelope(body: unknown): unknown;
+/**
+ * Narrow a body to an error envelope and, optionally, assert its code.
+ *
+ * The code is what clients program against (§17), so asserting on it rather than
+ * on the message is the difference between a test that survives a copy edit and
+ * one that does not.
+ */
+export declare function assertErrorEnvelope(body: unknown, expectedCode?: ErrorCode): ErrorResponse;
+/**
+ * Assert the envelope carries the correlation id the caller sent.
+ *
+ * This is the property §18 exists for: one id in the response, the log lines and
+ * any job the request spawned. A test that never checks it is how the id
+ * silently stops being propagated.
+ */
+export declare function assertCorrelated(body: unknown, expectedRequestId?: string): string;
+/** Assert a paginated envelope's counters are consistent with its page. */
+export declare function assertPaginated(body: unknown, expectedCount?: number): void;
+//# sourceMappingURL=envelope.d.ts.map

package/dist/assertions/envelope.js

@@ -0,0 +1,116 @@
+"use strict";
+/**
+ * Assertions about the response envelope (PLAN.md §16.1, §19).
+ *
+ * Every e2e test in every package makes the same three assertions about a
+ * response — that it is an envelope, that it carries the correlation id, and
+ * that an error's `code` is the stable one. Writing them by hand each time is
+ * how a test ends up asserting `response.body.data` exists while quietly
+ * accepting `success: false`.
+ *
+ * These throw plain `Error`s, so they work in any runner and inside a pack.
+ *
+ * The input is a real HTTP body, so it is modelled as one: `LooseEnvelope`
+ * describes what *might* be there rather than what should be. Casting straight to
+ * `ApiResponse` would make the checks below look redundant to the type checker
+ * while remaining exactly as necessary at runtime — the assertion would then be
+ * "the cast said so", which is no assertion at all.
+ */
+Object.defineProperty(exports, "__esModule", { value: true });
+exports.assertSuccessEnvelope = assertSuccessEnvelope;
+exports.assertErrorEnvelope = assertErrorEnvelope;
+exports.assertCorrelated = assertCorrelated;
+exports.assertPaginated = assertPaginated;
+/**
+ * Narrow a body to a success envelope, or throw with what it actually was.
+ *
+ * @returns the `data` member, so a caller can chain straight into assertions
+ */
+function assertSuccessEnvelope(body) {
+    const envelope = requireEnvelope(body);
+    if (envelope.success !== true) {
+        throw new Error(`Expected a success envelope but got an error: ${describe(envelope.error?.code, 'unknown')} — ${describe(envelope.error?.message, 'no message')}`);
+    }
+    if (!('data' in envelope)) {
+        throw new Error('A success envelope must carry a `data` member');
+    }
+    return envelope.data;
+}
+/**
+ * Narrow a body to an error envelope and, optionally, assert its code.
+ *
+ * The code is what clients program against (§17), so asserting on it rather than
+ * on the message is the difference between a test that survives a copy edit and
+ * one that does not.
+ */
+function assertErrorEnvelope(body, expectedCode) {
+    const envelope = requireEnvelope(body);
+    if (envelope.success !== false) {
+        throw new Error('Expected an error envelope but the response reported success');
+    }
+    const code = envelope.error?.code;
+    if (typeof code !== 'string' || typeof envelope.error?.message !== 'string') {
+        throw new Error('An error envelope must carry `error.code` and `error.message`');
+    }
+    if (expectedCode !== undefined && code !== expectedCode) {
+        throw new Error(`Expected error code ${expectedCode} but got ${code}`);
+    }
+    return envelope;
+}
+/**
+ * Assert the envelope carries the correlation id the caller sent.
+ *
+ * This is the property §18 exists for: one id in the response, the log lines and
+ * any job the request spawned. A test that never checks it is how the id
+ * silently stops being propagated.
+ */
+function assertCorrelated(body, expectedRequestId) {
+    const envelope = requireEnvelope(body);
+    const requestId = envelope.meta?.requestId;
+    if (typeof requestId !== 'string' || requestId === '') {
+        throw new Error('An envelope must carry `meta.requestId`');
+    }
+    if (expectedRequestId !== undefined && requestId !== expectedRequestId) {
+        throw new Error(`Expected requestId ${expectedRequestId} but the envelope carried ${requestId}`);
+    }
+    return requestId;
+}
+/** Assert a paginated envelope's counters are consistent with its page. */
+function assertPaginated(body, expectedCount) {
+    const envelope = requireEnvelope(body);
+    const pagination = envelope.meta?.pagination;
+    if (pagination === undefined) {
+        throw new Error('A paginated envelope must carry `meta.pagination`');
+    }
+    const data = envelope.data;
+    if (!Array.isArray(data)) {
+        throw new Error('A paginated envelope must carry an array in `data`');
+    }
+    const limit = pagination.limit;
+    if (typeof limit === 'number' && data.length > limit) {
+        // The specific defect an enforced `maxLimit` exists to prevent (§12): a page
+        // larger than the limit means the ceiling was not applied.
+        throw new Error(`A page of ${String(data.length)} records exceeds its own limit of ${String(limit)}`);
+    }
+    if (expectedCount !== undefined && pagination.count !== expectedCount) {
+        throw new Error(`Expected a count of ${String(expectedCount)} but got ${String(pagination.count)}`);
+    }
+}
+/** Render an untrusted member for a message without risking `[object Object]`. */
+function describe(value, fallback) {
+    if (value === undefined || value === null)
+        return fallback;
+    return typeof value === 'string' ? value : JSON.stringify(value);
+}
+function requireEnvelope(body) {
+    if (typeof body !== 'object' || body === null) {
+        throw new Error(`Expected an envelope object but got ${typeof body}`);
+    }
+    if (!('success' in body)) {
+        // Usually means the route is decorated `@NoEnvelope()`, which is worth
+        // saying out loud rather than failing on a missing `data`.
+        throw new Error('Expected an envelope with a `success` member; the route may be marked @NoEnvelope()');
+    }
+    return body;
+}
+//# sourceMappingURL=envelope.js.map