---
id: ADR-ACC-TRX-008
title: Separate Commerce Service Capability Grants
product_area: accounting
module: transactions
revision: 1
status: proposed
design_intent: confirmed
source_sha:
  services-accounting: f47cb263875bbc0c5640fba7dae6785ec32695f8
  react-console: baf6dae382d6f41dce976c7f848667ccc37e076f
decision: >-
  Commerce invokes separately granted Accounting billing, tender, reversal and
  tax capabilities as a registered service principal, with trusted route
  invocation and sensitivity on the money-moving capabilities.
constrains:
  - SVC-ACC-TRX-transactions
  - WF-ACC-TRX-001
  - WF-ACC-TRX-006
  - WF-ACC-TRX-008
  - WF-ACC-TRX-010
  - RESP-ACC
origin: >-
  Andrew’s D-07 (2026-10-17), Platform-issued service principals per caller:
  services-accounting:docs/architecture/accounting-2.0/02-decisions.md#D-07
  Service identity
alternatives:
  - option: Expose all Commerce operations through one grant.
    why_not: >-
      Independent billing and return authority would be impossible to express at
      function granularity.
  - option: Introduce a new service route-access class here.
    why_not: >-
      The current Platform route contract is represented through console
      declarations and trusted service invocation.
consequences:
  - >-
    Created documents record the service actor and preserve a supplied
    originating person.
  - >-
    Route selection validates names during module initialization and rejects
    missing declarations.
  - >-
    The tax capability and six legacy installment routes remain in the pinned
    Accounting surface despite the target ownership realignment.
supersedes: []
evidence:
  - >-
    services-accounting at f47cb263: aws/accounting.service-functions.ts;
    docs/architecture/accounting-2.0/02-decisions.md D-07, M4-1, M4-8.
---
# Separate Commerce Service Capability Grants

## Context

Order processing needs accounting capabilities with independent grants. The current route access classification and the service-function grant are separate authorization mechanisms.

## Decision

The structured decision records the governing boundary and its observed limits. Its origin distinguishes Andrew’s rulings from reversible implementation choices and proposed publication policy.

## Alternatives Considered

The listed alternatives explain the competing responsibility or recovery approaches and why the recorded direction differs. They are explanatory comparisons, without evidence of a separate approval discussion for each alternative.

## Consequences

The consequence rows identify implementation obligations, current departures and gaps requiring further verification. Artifact status remains proposed until Andrew approves it.