The wire said Application, the domain said Aanvraag — one aggregate with
two names at every hop. Rename the backend DTOs and the /applications
route to /aanvragen, regenerate the typed client, and rename the frontend
adapter/store to match.
Renamed: ApplicationSummaryDto/DetailDto, CreateApplicationRequest,
SubmitApplicationRequest/Response → Aanvraag* equivalents;
ApplicationsAdapter/Store → AanvragenAdapter/Store;
applications.adapter.ts/applications.store.ts → aanvragen.*.
Left untouched: the admin Case/Zaak vocabulary (/admin/cases,
AdminCasesStore) — a separate read model, not part of this rename; the
internal BigRegister.Domain.Applications namespace and the Applications
EF table (renaming those needs a new EF migration, out of scope here).
Part of the dashboard-readability refactor (see the approved plan).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
All five authorization gates audited only their deny branch, so /beheer/audit
could answer "who was turned away" but never "who changed this" — for a
register whose integrity is the product, the wrong half. Nothing recorded the
flag toggle, either org-template write, the admin case or upload delete, the
three brief transitions, or the besluit; the comment claiming endpoints log
their own effect held for two of the eight.
Each gate now computes the decision once, audits it, and then acts. The row
is written by the gate rather than the endpoint, so a new admin endpoint
cannot be added that forgets to audit itself. Same reasoning for the brief:
every transition already funnelled through LogBrief for its log line, so the
audit row goes there too — submit/approve/reject/send in one place, with the
transition's own outcome as the decision, so a 403 or 409 is as visible as a
success.
FlagsAdmin gained a per-call resource, the one deviation from BIO-007's
minimal remediation: the toggle endpoint writes no log line of its own, so a
constant "feature-flags" row would say a flag changed without saying which.
It now records feature-flags/<key>=<value>. OrgAdmin and CasesAdmin keep
coarse refs because those endpoints do log the specific object.
The besluit gets a second row: the gate records that a behandelaar was
allowed to act, aanvraag:besluit records what they decided.
Row volume goes up — StamdataAdmin gates read endpoints, so admin page loads
now write rows. That is what auditing the allow path means; it is also what
would make retention on AuthzAuditStore necessary later.
Closes CQ-004's outstanding half and unblocks signing ADR-C-009.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
bdd.mdx previously banned "Given/When/Then ceremony" outright, which
directly contradicted WP-70's own acceptance tests (Acceptance/
BesluitLifecycleTests.cs already used // Given/When/Then comments) and
the backend's organically-evolved PascalCase_snake_sentence convention,
which the doc gave zero guidance for. Reverses that rule: every test is
now structured Given -> When -> Then, with a genuinely empty phase
omitted rather than faked; present-tense declarative naming and the
one-behaviour-per-test rule are unchanged. ADR-0006 gets a cross-reference
so both documents agree everywhere, not just in acceptance tests.
Also closes out the doc's other named-but-unenforced rules found by the
audit: fixes the 5 files asserting rendered $localize copy instead of
the underlying tag/message-id (the compliant pattern already existed in
werkvoorraad-item-view.spec.ts), splits the multi-behaviour titles the
doc itself calls a smell (";", "and", "/"), and fixes bdd.mdx's own false
citation of registratie-wizard.machine.spec.ts as "one transition per
test" by actually splitting that test into one-transition-per-test.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The doc-comment claimed "the backend re-validates on submit as the authority" —
it doesn't. Neither SubmitApplicationRequest nor IntakeRequest carries a scholing
answer at all, so there's nothing to re-validate; both submit paths only apply
SubmissionRules.RejectZeroUren. A crafted POST can bypass the scholing requirement
entirely. States the gap and points to WP-69 (opened, not yet planned) for the
enforcement, which needs a wire change.
Also strengthens the F2 concurrency test to assert the persisted status matches
whichever request actually won the race, and updates WP-68's own Decisions/
acceptance-criteria text to reflect two implementation choices that improved on
the original write-up once real constraints surfaced: ProcessingWindow stays on
ApplicationStore (StatusAt is already in the same file), and AanvraagStatusTag is
not given a Concept member (would have broken
AanvraagStatusTag_covers_the_published_lifecycle) — AanvraagStatus.Tag is nullable
instead, null exactly for Concept.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
- Concurrent_besluiten_on_the_same_aanvraag_yield_exactly_one_success: races two
besluiten on the same open aanvraag, asserts exactly one 200 and one 409 — the
behavior F2's in-lock guard exists to guarantee.
- Only_a_non_approval_requires_a_toelichting: unit test for
BeoordelingRules.RequiresToelichting (F6).
- A_terminal_decision_refuses_any_further_besluit /
MeerInfoOpvragen_is_not_terminal_a_further_besluit_is_still_legal: the transition
table at the aggregate level (T3) — an Aanvraag whose BesluitStatus already records
a decision computes a terminal StatusAt, and CanDecide refuses a further besluit,
independent of the endpoint-level equivalent.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Adds POST /beoordeling/{id}/besluit: a Besluit enum (Goedkeuren/Afwijzen/
MeerInfoOpvragen) backed by new Aanvraag.BesluitStatus/BesluitToelichting
columns, gated by the same BeoordelingRules.CanDecide the read side's
canBesluiten flag already uses (409 on an illegal transition, 400 on a
missing required toelichting). Mappers.ToStatusDto gains the "a recorded
decision wins" branch. FE: besluit.machine.ts + besluit-form organism
(same form idiom as change-request-form), wired into the beoordeling page
behind the server's canBesluiten flag.
Completes WP-65 (65a + 65b) — verified end-to-end against a running
backend (werkvoorraad -> beoordeling -> besluit -> status reflected back).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
New GET /beoordeling/{id} shows one aanvraag's status, linked documents, and a
canBesluiten decision flag, gated by the same CanBeoordelen capability as the
werkvoorraad list. Reads through IZaakSource.ListCases rather than a new seam
method (WP-66 needs one anyway for the real write); owner BSN is masked.
Fixes a real gap found while wiring this up: the behandelportal's login was still
WP-61's copied citizen/BSN DigiD flow, so nothing ever sent X-Medewerker and the
werkvoorraad screen (WP-64) always denied in a real browser. A dev-only
medewerkerInterceptor (mirrors the existing ?role= stand-in as ?rollen=) fixes that.
WP-65's own Risks note authorized splitting read from write across sessions given
its size; this is the read half. The decision-recording mutation is next (65b).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
ehoandClaude Opus 5