--- id: ATS-PFM-TNL-004 scope: CAP-PFM-TNL-004 product_area: platform module: tenant-lifecycle revision: 1 status: proposed approved_by: null approved_at: null source_sha: services-platform: ad3f6a6582843008ed0f5a17b131878d15829af1 services-crm: a8d1364f1dd44b723bb5f9acba12f983e9ec8d69 services-commerce: c8b66a98e2490617aec38ba5c8165dd9bd0a8f9b services-committees: 36129c24daeaadcdb339218c38cdeaff9861359d services-membership: 5994c270e8a37a30f848e99ba5b5ee6b87c08893 services-submissions: 64236c19be89579ef5897aad7de3925ed3ce03bf services-websites: 5fc6823c69d5e6f208c21dba8c0eb3132f8bdc4c services-marketing: d071a159fe9782bb71ff246d5c67d5bbfe07fbfa rhythm-v2-docs: d318a948692343e2f0a7ecc2e11c50db179a8c95 scenarios: - id: ATS-PFM-TNL-004-01 title: Existing customers receive no first-admin invitation level: api proves: - BR-CAP-PFM-TNL-004-01 preconditions: The request names a person for an existing customer. steps: Complete provisioning. expected: No first-administrator invitation is sent. negative: true data_needs: >- Use the run-owned records and caller contexts created by the cited tests; use their provider and clock seams only where declared. bound_to: - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/provision-tenant.integration.spec.js#invites nobody when the request did not create the customer - TST-PFM-TNL-082 provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/provision-tenant.integration.spec.js#invites nobody when the request did not create the customer category: rule action_evidence: provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/provision-tenant.integration.spec.js#invites nobody when the request did not create the customer assertion_evidence: provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/provision-tenant.integration.spec.js#invites nobody when the request did not create the customer binding_note: >- All cited checks for this scenario occur in the registered file. The link establishes inspected executable source rather than a passing run. - id: ATS-PFM-TNL-004-02 title: New-customer invitation establishes the intended role level: api proves: - BR-CAP-PFM-TNL-004-02 preconditions: A new customer request names its first administrator. steps: Run the administration participant. expected: One invited console identity receives customer-scoped Administrator authority and one invitation. negative: false data_needs: >- Use the run-owned records and caller contexts created by the cited tests; use their provider and clock seams only where declared. bound_to: - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/lifecycle/first-administrator.integration.spec.js#leaves an invited console user of the customer holding the address - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/lifecycle/first-administrator.integration.spec.js#grants that user the Administrator role at the customer, waiting on their acceptance - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/lifecycle/first-administrator.integration.spec.js#sends them one invitation - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/unit/services/lifecycle/first-administrator.spec.ts#grants the built-in Administrator role, by the product key the catalog publishes it under provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/lifecycle/first-administrator.integration.spec.js#leaves an invited console user of the customer holding the address category: rule action_evidence: provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/lifecycle/first-administrator.integration.spec.js#leaves an invited console user of the customer holding the address assertion_evidence: provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/lifecycle/first-administrator.integration.spec.js#leaves an invited console user of the customer holding the address binding_note: >- The original test-title references contribute separate assertions from several files. No suite receives an implements link for the complete combined scenario; a full executable mapping remains FND-PFM-TNL-084. binding_gap: FND-PFM-TNL-084 - id: ATS-PFM-TNL-004-03 title: Administration invitation survives retry level: api proves: - BR-CAP-PFM-TNL-004-03 preconditions: The original build recorded its administrator invitation. steps: Repeat the provisioning work. expected: The ledger retains that invitation without a second send. negative: false data_needs: >- Use the run-owned records and caller contexts created by the cited tests; use their provider and clock seams only where declared. bound_to: - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/provision-tenant.integration.spec.js#invites them once, and records the invitation in the ledger - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/provision-tenant.integration.spec.js#does not invite them a second time when the provisioning is run again - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/lifecycle/first-administrator.integration.spec.js#sends no second invitation provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/provision-tenant.integration.spec.js#invites them once, and records the invitation in the ledger category: invariant action_evidence: provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/provision-tenant.integration.spec.js#invites them once, and records the invitation in the ledger assertion_evidence: provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/provision-tenant.integration.spec.js#invites them once, and records the invitation in the ledger binding_note: >- The original test-title references contribute separate assertions from several files. No suite receives an implements link for the complete combined scenario; a full executable mapping remains FND-PFM-TNL-084. binding_gap: FND-PFM-TNL-084 - id: ATS-PFM-TNL-004-04 title: Unusable administration authority is refused level: unit proves: - BR-CAP-PFM-TNL-004-04 preconditions: 'Existing identities exercise suspension, incorrect role or scope and ineffective validity periods.' steps: Attempt to adopt each identity. expected: Each incompatible state reports a refusal that directs staff toward correction. negative: true data_needs: >- Use the run-owned records and caller contexts created by the cited tests; use their provider and clock seams only where declared. bound_to: - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/unit/services/lifecycle/first-administrator.spec.ts#refuses a SUSPENDED user, whatever they hold: an administrator nobody can use is none - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/unit/services/lifecycle/first-administrator.spec.ts#refuses when the grant is of another role, which administers nothing - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/unit/services/lifecycle/first-administrator.spec.ts#refuses when the Administrator grant is at tenant scope rather than the customer’s own - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/unit/services/lifecycle/first-administrator.spec.ts#refuses a grant that has already ended - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/lifecycle/first-administrator.integration.spec.js#refuses the job rather than reporting an administrator the customer does not have provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/unit/services/lifecycle/first-administrator.spec.ts#refuses a SUSPENDED user, whatever they hold: an administrator nobody can use is none category: validation action_evidence: provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/unit/services/lifecycle/first-administrator.spec.ts#refuses a SUSPENDED user, whatever they hold: an administrator nobody can use is none assertion_evidence: provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/unit/services/lifecycle/first-administrator.spec.ts#refuses a SUSPENDED user, whatever they hold: an administrator nobody can use is none binding_note: >- The original test-title references contribute separate assertions from several files. No suite receives an implements link for the complete combined scenario; a full executable mapping remains FND-PFM-TNL-084. binding_gap: FND-PFM-TNL-084 - id: ATS-PFM-TNL-004-05 title: Invalid sender inputs retain no workspace level: api proves: - BR-CAP-PFM-TNL-004-05 preconditions: 'Sender variants violate strategy, domain or address requirements.' steps: Submit each request. expected: The response identifies invalid input and creation leaves no workspace. negative: true data_needs: >- Use the run-owned records and caller contexts created by the cited tests; use their provider and clock seams only where declared. bound_to: - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/tenant-email-strategy.integration.spec.js#refuses the domain strategy without a domain when the tenant has none of its own to lend it - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/tenant-email-strategy.integration.spec.js#refuses a domain under the address strategy, which proves the one mailbox and nothing else - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/tenant-email-strategy.integration.spec.js#refuses an address outside the domain, because an identity proved for one domain may not send as another - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/tenant-email-strategy.integration.spec.js#refuses a domain that is a URL rather than a hostname - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/tenant-email-strategy.integration.spec.js#refuses a strategy outside the closed list - TST-PFM-TNL-085 provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/tenant-email-strategy.integration.spec.js#refuses the domain strategy without a domain when the tenant has none of its own to lend it category: validation action_evidence: provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/tenant-email-strategy.integration.spec.js#refuses the domain strategy without a domain when the tenant has none of its own to lend it assertion_evidence: provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/tenant-email-strategy.integration.spec.js#refuses the domain strategy without a domain when the tenant has none of its own to lend it binding_note: >- All cited checks for this scenario occur in the registered file. The link establishes inspected executable source rather than a passing run. - id: ATS-PFM-TNL-004-06 title: Hostname identity supplies a sender domain level: api proves: - BR-CAP-PFM-TNL-004-06 preconditions: A hostname workspace identifier accompanies a domain strategy with no supplied domain. steps: Submit the sender-bearing request. expected: The requested identity uses the workspace hostname as its domain. negative: false data_needs: >- Use the run-owned records and caller contexts created by the cited tests; use their provider and clock seams only where declared. bound_to: - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/tenant-email-strategy.integration.spec.js#proves the tenant’s id as the domain, the id being a hostname - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/e2e/tenant-email-sender.e2e.spec.js#proves the tenant’s own domain, because the request left the strategy’s domain to it provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/tenant-email-strategy.integration.spec.js#proves the tenant’s id as the domain, the id being a hostname category: boundary action_evidence: provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/tenant-email-strategy.integration.spec.js#proves the tenant’s id as the domain, the id being a hostname assertion_evidence: provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/tenant-email-strategy.integration.spec.js#proves the tenant’s id as the domain, the id being a hostname binding_note: >- The original test-title references contribute separate assertions from several files. No suite receives an implements link for the complete combined scenario; a full executable mapping remains FND-PFM-TNL-084. binding_gap: FND-PFM-TNL-084 - id: ATS-PFM-TNL-004-07 title: Pending DNS does not block opening level: api proves: - BR-CAP-PFM-TNL-004-07 preconditions: A domain sender request remains unverified. steps: Finish construction and inspect its sender. expected: The workspace opens while the pending identity exposes required DNS records. negative: false data_needs: >- Use the run-owned records and caller contexts created by the cited tests; use their provider and clock seams only where declared. bound_to: - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/tenant-email-strategy.integration.spec.js#opens the tenant anyway, which is what option A promises - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/tenant-email-strategy.integration.spec.js#leaves its sender identity pending, for the customer to finish in their own time - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/e2e/tenant-email-sender.e2e.spec.js#answers the DNS records the customer must publish, so a support person can read them out provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/tenant-email-strategy.integration.spec.js#opens the tenant anyway, which is what option A promises category: transition action_evidence: provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/tenant-email-strategy.integration.spec.js#opens the tenant anyway, which is what option A promises assertion_evidence: provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/tenant-email-strategy.integration.spec.js#opens the tenant anyway, which is what option A promises binding_note: >- The original test-title references contribute separate assertions from several files. No suite receives an implements link for the complete combined scenario; a full executable mapping remains FND-PFM-TNL-084. binding_gap: FND-PFM-TNL-084 - id: ATS-PFM-TNL-004-08 title: Portal construction is deferred level: unit proves: - BR-CAP-PFM-TNL-004-09 preconditions: The portal participant receives a workspace with recorded portal interest. steps: Invoke provisioning. expected: The response is not applicable and no pool is built. negative: false data_needs: >- Use the run-owned records and caller contexts created by the cited tests; use their provider and clock seams only where declared. bound_to: - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/unit/services/lifecycle/participants.spec.js#creates nothing when a tenant is provisioned, because the pool is built when Websites is enabled - TST-PFM-TNL-097 provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/unit/services/lifecycle/participants.spec.js#creates nothing when a tenant is provisioned, because the pool is built when Websites is enabled category: rule action_evidence: provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/unit/services/lifecycle/participants.spec.js#creates nothing when a tenant is provisioned, because the pool is built when Websites is enabled assertion_evidence: provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/unit/services/lifecycle/participants.spec.js#creates nothing when a tenant is provisioned, because the pool is built when Websites is enabled binding_note: >- All cited checks for this scenario occur in the registered file. The link establishes inspected executable source rather than a passing run. - id: ATS-PFM-TNL-004-09 title: First access and sender setup coexist level: api proves: - AS-JNY-PFM-TNL-001-04 preconditions: The new-customer journey includes an administrator and domain sender. steps: Complete its provisioning fixture. expected: The invitation is recorded once and the workspace opens with verification pending. negative: false data_needs: >- Use the run-owned records and caller contexts created by the cited tests; use their provider and clock seams only where declared. bound_to: - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/provision-tenant.integration.spec.js#invites them once, and records the invitation in the ledger - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/tenant-email-strategy.integration.spec.js#opens the tenant anyway, which is what option A promises provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/provision-tenant.integration.spec.js#invites them once, and records the invitation in the ledger category: interaction action_evidence: provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/provision-tenant.integration.spec.js#invites them once, and records the invitation in the ledger assertion_evidence: provenance: test source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/provision-tenant.integration.spec.js#invites them once, and records the invitation in the ledger binding_note: >- The original test-title references contribute separate assertions from several files. No suite receives an implements link for the complete combined scenario; a full executable mapping remains FND-PFM-TNL-084. binding_gap: FND-PFM-TNL-084 - id: ATS-PFM-TNL-004-10 title: Refused first-access input leaves no accepted construction category: interaction level: api proves: - BR-CAP-PFM-TNL-004-04 interacts_with: - CAP-PFM-TNL-001 - CAP-PFM-TNL-003 preconditions: >- A staff request creates a customer and names an administrator whose existing identity has incompatible authority. steps: >- Submit the request, let first-administrator provisioning reach its authority check and inspect the build and invitation records. expected: >- The participant refuses, the build remains failed for staff recovery and no second invitation is sent. This checks a build-stage refusal rather than submission rollback. negative: true data_needs: >- Create a separate run-owned workspace for each decision branch and an unaffected comparison workspace. Use a controlled clock, paused task or injected fault at the boundary named in the scenario. bound_to: [] provenance: proposed source: >- rhythm-v2-docs:specs/platform/tenant-lifecycle/planning/capabilities/CAP-PFM-TNL-004-give-a-new-customer-its-first-administrator-and-its-own-e.md; rhythm-v2-docs:specs/platform/tenant-lifecycle/planning/capabilities/CAP-PFM-TNL-001-ask-for-a-new-workspace-and-have-every-application-build-it.md; rhythm-v2-docs:specs/platform/tenant-lifecycle/planning/capabilities/CAP-PFM-TNL-003-follow-a-provisioning-retry-it-and-hear-how-it-ended.md action_evidence: provenance: proposed source: >- rhythm-v2-docs:specs/platform/tenant-lifecycle/planning/capabilities/CAP-PFM-TNL-004-give-a-new-customer-its-first-administrator-and-its-own-e.md; rhythm-v2-docs:specs/platform/tenant-lifecycle/planning/capabilities/CAP-PFM-TNL-001-ask-for-a-new-workspace-and-have-every-application-build-it.md; rhythm-v2-docs:specs/platform/tenant-lifecycle/planning/capabilities/CAP-PFM-TNL-003-follow-a-provisioning-retry-it-and-hear-how-it-ended.md assertion_evidence: provenance: proposed source: >- rhythm-v2-docs:specs/platform/tenant-lifecycle/planning/capabilities/CAP-PFM-TNL-004-give-a-new-customer-its-first-administrator-and-its-own-e.md; rhythm-v2-docs:specs/platform/tenant-lifecycle/planning/capabilities/CAP-PFM-TNL-001-ask-for-a-new-workspace-and-have-every-application-build-it.md; rhythm-v2-docs:specs/platform/tenant-lifecycle/planning/capabilities/CAP-PFM-TNL-003-follow-a-provisioning-retry-it-and-hear-how-it-ended.md evidence: - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/provision-tenant.integration.spec.js#invites nobody when the request did not create the customer - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/lifecycle/first-administrator.integration.spec.js#leaves an invited console user of the customer holding the address - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/provision-tenant.integration.spec.js#invites them once, and records the invitation in the ledger - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/unit/services/lifecycle/first-administrator.spec.ts#refuses a SUSPENDED user, whatever they hold: an administrator nobody can use is none - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/tenant-email-strategy.integration.spec.js#refuses the domain strategy without a domain when the tenant has none of its own to lend it - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/tenant-email-strategy.integration.spec.js#proves the tenant’s id as the domain, the id being a hostname - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/integration/services/provisioning/tenant-email-strategy.integration.spec.js#opens the tenant anyway, which is what option A promises - >- services-platform:modules/tenants/tests/unit/services/lifecycle/participants.spec.js#creates nothing when a tenant is provisioned, because the pool is built when Websites is enabled - >- rhythm-v2-docs:specs/platform/tenant-lifecycle/planning/capabilities/CAP-PFM-TNL-004-give-a-new-customer-its-first-administrator-and-its-own-e.md; rhythm-v2-docs:specs/platform/tenant-lifecycle/planning/capabilities/CAP-PFM-TNL-001-ask-for-a-new-workspace-and-have-every-application-build-it.md; rhythm-v2-docs:specs/platform/tenant-lifecycle/planning/capabilities/CAP-PFM-TNL-003-follow-a-provisioning-retry-it-and-hear-how-it-ended.md coverage: rule: covered transition: 'gap: FND-PFM-TNL-069' validation: covered permission: 'gap: FND-PFM-TNL-069' edge: 'gap: FND-PFM-TNL-069' failure: 'gap: FND-PFM-TNL-069' boundary: covered concurrency: 'gap: FND-PFM-TNL-069' invariant: covered interaction: covered coverage_notes: transition: >- The listed scenarios sample lifecycle changes. Complete transition, guard and side-effect proof is still owed for the state models named in the coverage finding. interaction: >- The added interaction is proposed. Related capabilities not included in that scenario remain named in the coverage finding. transition_obligations: - state_model: STATE-PFM-TNL-001 transition_n: 1 coverage: 'gap: FND-PFM-TNL-069' provenance: observed source: 'services-platform:modules/tenants/services/persistence/tenants.ts:activateProvisionedTenant' - state_model: STATE-PFM-TNL-001 transition_n: 2 coverage: 'gap: FND-PFM-TNL-069' provenance: observed source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/services/provisioning/provision-tenant-failure.ts:applyTenantProvisioningFailure - state_model: STATE-PFM-TNL-001 transition_n: 3 coverage: 'gap: FND-PFM-TNL-069' provenance: observed source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/services/provisioning/submit-tenant-provisioning.ts:retryTenantProvisioning - state_model: STATE-PFM-TNL-001 transition_n: 4 coverage: 'gap: FND-PFM-TNL-069' provenance: observed source: 'services-platform:modules/tenants/services/deletion/request-deletion.ts:requestTenantDeletion' - state_model: STATE-PFM-TNL-001 transition_n: 5 coverage: 'gap: FND-PFM-TNL-069' provenance: observed source: 'services-platform:modules/tenants/services/persistence/tenants.ts:enterTenantLoading' - state_model: STATE-PFM-TNL-001 transition_n: 6 coverage: 'gap: FND-PFM-TNL-069' provenance: observed source: 'services-platform:modules/tenants/services/deletion/request-deletion.ts:requestTenantDeletion' - state_model: STATE-PFM-TNL-001 transition_n: 7 coverage: 'gap: FND-PFM-TNL-069' provenance: observed source: 'services-platform:modules/tenants/services/persistence/tenants.ts:activateLoadedTenant' - state_model: STATE-PFM-TNL-001 transition_n: 8 coverage: 'gap: FND-PFM-TNL-069' provenance: observed source: 'services-platform:modules/tenants/services/lifecycle/lifecycle-transitions.ts:SUCCESSORS' - state_model: STATE-PFM-TNL-001 transition_n: 9 coverage: 'gap: FND-PFM-TNL-069' provenance: observed source: 'services-platform:modules/tenants/services/deletion/deletion-holds.ts:cancelTenantDeletion' - state_model: STATE-PFM-TNL-001 transition_n: 10 coverage: 'gap: FND-PFM-TNL-069' provenance: observed source: 'services-platform:modules/tenants/services/deletion/begin-destruction.ts:beginTenantDestruction' - state_model: STATE-PFM-TNL-001 transition_n: 11 coverage: 'gap: FND-PFM-TNL-069' provenance: observed source: 'services-platform:modules/tenants/services/persistence/tenants.ts:forceTenantDeletingAfterRestore' - state_model: STATE-PFM-TNL-002 transition_n: 1 coverage: 'gap: FND-PFM-TNL-069' provenance: observed source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/services/provisioning/provision-tenant-operations.ts:tenantProvisioningOperations - state_model: STATE-PFM-TNL-002 transition_n: 2 coverage: 'gap: FND-PFM-TNL-069' provenance: documented source: 'services-platform:docs/jobs.md#§2 step 8' - state_model: STATE-PFM-TNL-002 transition_n: 3 coverage: 'gap: FND-PFM-TNL-069' provenance: observed source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/services/provisioning/provision-tenant-operations.ts:tenantProvisioningOperations - state_model: STATE-PFM-TNL-002 transition_n: 4 coverage: 'gap: FND-PFM-TNL-069' provenance: observed source: >- services-platform:modules/tenants/services/provisioning/provision-tenant-workflow.ts:tenantProvisioningWorkflow permission_obligations: - key: hq.tenants.provision where_checked: api scenario_examples: [] coverage: 'gap: FND-PFM-TNL-069' note: 'Examples do not establish the complete key-by-key grant, revoked-grant and staff-context matrix.' provenance: documented source: >- rhythm-v2-docs:specs/platform/tenant-lifecycle/planning/capabilities/CAP-PFM-TNL-004-give-a-new-customer-its-first-administrator-and-its-own-e.md evidence_note: >- The test-specific convention lists an Evidence body section, but the corpus checker rejects it. Sources and verification limits remain in frontmatter so this artifact conforms without changing the checker. --- # Prepare the customer’s first access and sender: Capability Test Specification ## Coverage The category map separates defined scenarios from missing proof. A covered category has a scenario; a binding records inspected test assertions and carries no execution result. State-model completeness and untested interactions remain explicit gaps. | Rule | Proved by | |---|---| | `BR-CAP-PFM-TNL-004-01` | `ATS-PFM-TNL-004-01` | | `BR-CAP-PFM-TNL-004-02` | `ATS-PFM-TNL-004-02` | | `BR-CAP-PFM-TNL-004-03` | `ATS-PFM-TNL-004-03` | | `BR-CAP-PFM-TNL-004-04` | `ATS-PFM-TNL-004-04`, `ATS-PFM-TNL-004-10` | | `BR-CAP-PFM-TNL-004-05` | `ATS-PFM-TNL-004-05` | | `BR-CAP-PFM-TNL-004-06` | `ATS-PFM-TNL-004-06` | | `BR-CAP-PFM-TNL-004-07` | `ATS-PFM-TNL-004-07` | | `BR-CAP-PFM-TNL-004-09` | `ATS-PFM-TNL-004-08` | ## Interactions With Related Capabilities Refused first-access input leaves no accepted construction. The combined scenario sets up the stated boundary, changes the upstream condition and observes its effect on the dependent outcome. Its steps and assertions are proposed; component tests do not establish this combined execution. | Related capability | Combined coverage | |---|---| | `CAP-PFM-TNL-001` | `ATS-PFM-TNL-004-10` (proposed) |