"Six laser sessions" is the common case in an aesthetics clinic: the patient
pays once and books the sessions later.
Credit is a ledger, not a counter. No table has a remaining/used_count column
and a schema test enforces that — the balance is always SUM(delta) over
append-only rows, so every number a patient sees has a full history behind it.
Corrections are new rows, never edits.
- purchase / consume / refund / adjustment / expiry, each with a reason, an
author and the appointment it belongs to
- consume happens in confirm(), never in quote(): if the preview consumed, a
page refresh would cost the patient a session
- cancelling adds a refund row; the consume row stays
- FIFO across a patient's packages — the oldest is closest to expiring
- an empty package is not an error, it just does not apply and the patient pays
- adjust/expire need a doctor or clinic role, and adjust always needs a reason
- app:package:expire writes the closing row so "where did my 3 sessions go?"
always has an answer
Consume takes a pessimistic lock on the one package row. That is the opposite
of task 07's slot buckets, and docs/api/package.md carries the table explaining
why, so nobody unifies them later.
Idempotency checks for an existing consume row before inserting rather than
catching the unique violation: in Doctrine that exception closes the
EntityManager and burns the rest of the request. The unique key stays as the
last line of defence.
Admin: PackagesPage, a packages tab on the patient record, and a ledger page
whose running-balance column shows where the final number came from.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Rules become data instead of code: a clinic can say "laser under 18 requires
parental consent" without a deploy.
Engine
- Policy / PolicyVersionLog entities, closed field/operator/effect lists per
category (PolicySchema), condition validation at write time
- PolicyResolver: priority -> specificity -> age, combining effects by
veto / max / sum / union
- A missing fact fails its clause instead of silently passing it
- Policies are drafts until activated, and are versioned rather than edited
Wiring
- selection -> ServiceSelectionValidator
- eligibility + spacing -> BookingPolicyGuard, at hold time not confirm time
- resource + timing -> AppointmentPlanBuilder, including template-less services
- pricing -> PricingEngine, alongside (not replacing) the manual discount
The condition column is named condition_json: `condition` is a MariaDB keyword
and broke every INSERT.
Tests: 17 in tests/Policy including NoPolicyRegressionTest, which pins that a
clinic with no policies sees byte-identical output to task 08.
Docs: docs/api/policy.md (real captured JSON) + docs/architecture/policy-engine.md.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Section 12 and the fifth closing rule: changing a price never changes an
already-booked appointment.
The pricing chain already existed and worked. Two things were missing. Tariff only
carries a year, so a rate change starting in Mehr could not be expressed — PriceList
now takes an explicit date range and Tariff remains the layer beneath it. And an
appointment stored a single number, so after a price change or a discount nobody
could say what those 2,400,000 rials were made of.
Price resolution walks four layers per service and takes the first hit: branch
override, then the covering price list, then the yearly tariff, then the service's own
price. The last one is the guarantee that a date no list covers still returns a price
rather than zero or an exception. breakdown.sources reports which layer answered, so a
surprising number can be traced instead of guessed at.
Two calculation decisions worth stating. Tax is computed on the patient's share, not
the gross — a patient does not pay tax on the portion the insurer covers. And a
discount larger than the amount floors the total at zero rather than going negative,
because a negative balance would mean the clinic owes the patient money, which nothing
downstream is built to mean.
A branch-specific list deliberately does not count as overlapping a general one; it
takes precedence instead. Treating them as a conflict would have made per-branch
exceptions impossible to express. Lists have no effect until activated, so drafting
next quarter's prices cannot disturb today's.
PriceSnapshot has no setters and a unique key on appointment_id: a snapshot that can
be edited is not a snapshot, and two invoices for one appointment would be two truths.
Corrections are a new row plus voiding the old one. Invoices are written during
confirm with the prices of that moment — computing later would let a rate change
between booking and invoicing produce a different number, which is exactly what rule
five forbids.
12 tests. The one that matters is
testBookedAppointmentKeepsItsOriginalInvoiceAfterAPriceChange: book, double the
service price, watch quote return the new number while the appointment's invoice
returns the old one. Without it rule five is only a claim.
1220 tests / 3551 assertions. phpstan back at its 14-error baseline. Frozen slot
contract green.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
