{
  "schema_version": "1.0.0",
  "synthetic": true,
  "title": "Outcome Failure Lab: Green run, wrong outcome",
  "run_green_definition": "Every configured technical step reported success and no unhandled error was recorded. This does not mean the intended business outcome was correct.",
  "evidence_boundary": "These fictional illustrations are not customer incidents or benchmarks. They do not establish failure frequency or show that OutcomeTest would detect these defects—or every defect—in a real workflow.",
  "field_order": [
    "case_id",
    "failure_class",
    "title",
    "scenario",
    "business_invariant",
    "technical_status",
    "synthetic_input",
    "expected_result",
    "actual_result",
    "missing_control",
    "adverse_test",
    "limitation"
  ],
  "cases": [
    {
      "case_id": "OT-LAB-001",
      "failure_class": "wrong entity or mapping",
      "title": "Green run, wrong record",
      "scenario": "In this fictional record-sync scenario, an operations team intends to apply a synthetic service-level change to one internal account record.",
      "business_invariant": "Only the destination whose immutable entity key equals ACCT-SYN-017 may change. ACCT-SYN-071 must remain unchanged.",
      "technical_status": "RUN: GREEN — every configured technical step reported success; no unhandled error was recorded.",
      "synthetic_input": {
        "event_id": "EVT-SYN-001",
        "source_entity_id": "ACCT-SYN-017",
        "requested_level": "standard"
      },
      "expected_result": "ACCT-SYN-017 is set to standard; ACCT-SYN-071 is unchanged; the receipt identifies ACCT-SYN-017 as the only written destination.",
      "actual_result": "ACCT-SYN-071 is set to standard; ACCT-SYN-017 is unchanged; the technical run still reports success.",
      "missing_control": "Entity-match control: require immutable-key equality before the write and reconcile the written destination key against the accepted input after the write.",
      "adverse_test": "In an isolated agency-controlled test environment, seed ACCT-SYN-017 and ACCT-SYN-071 with deliberately similar display labels, reverse their list order, submit the same synthetic input, and assert that only the exact-key destination changes.",
      "limitation": "Synthetic illustration only; not a customer incident. It proves neither how often this failure occurs nor that OutcomeTest would detect this or every defect in a real workflow."
    },
    {
      "case_id": "OT-LAB-002",
      "failure_class": "stale or late result",
      "title": "Fresh state overwritten by a late event",
      "scenario": "In this fictional status-sync scenario, two synthetic versions for the same work item arrive out of order.",
      "business_invariant": "The destination may retain only the greatest accepted source version for ITEM-SYN-044. An older event must not overwrite a newer accepted state.",
      "technical_status": "RUN: GREEN — every configured technical step reported success; no unhandled error was recorded.",
      "synthetic_input": {
        "newer_event": "EVT-SYN-202 | ITEM-SYN-044 | version 12 | ready | observed 14:03",
        "late_event": "EVT-SYN-201 | ITEM-SYN-044 | version 11 | pending | observed 14:00 | delivered 14:05"
      },
      "expected_result": "Version 12 and status ready remain at the destination; version 11 is rejected or quarantined as stale.",
      "actual_result": "The late version-11 event changes the destination back to pending; the technical run for that event still reports success.",
      "missing_control": "Freshness-and-order control: compare the incoming version with the accepted version watermark before mutation, then reconcile the destination version after the write.",
      "adverse_test": "In an isolated agency-controlled test environment, deliver version 12 first and version 11 second, then assert that the late event causes no destination mutation and is recorded as stale.",
      "limitation": "Synthetic illustration only; not a customer incident. It proves neither how often this failure occurs nor that OutcomeTest would detect this or every defect in a real workflow."
    },
    {
      "case_id": "OT-LAB-003",
      "failure_class": "incomplete or partial result",
      "title": "Complete flag, missing required item",
      "scenario": "In this fictional handoff scenario, a synthetic package contains three required checklist items.",
      "business_invariant": "PACKAGE-SYN-008 may be marked complete only when CHK-SYN-A, CHK-SYN-B, and CHK-SYN-C all exist at the destination exactly once.",
      "technical_status": "RUN: GREEN — every configured technical step reported success; no unhandled error was recorded.",
      "synthetic_input": {
        "package_id": "PACKAGE-SYN-008",
        "required_item_ids": "CHK-SYN-A | CHK-SYN-B | CHK-SYN-C",
        "required_count": "3"
      },
      "expected_result": "All three required item IDs exist exactly once and only then is PACKAGE-SYN-008 marked complete.",
      "actual_result": "CHK-SYN-A and CHK-SYN-B exist, CHK-SYN-C is absent, and PACKAGE-SYN-008 is marked complete; the technical run still reports success.",
      "missing_control": "Completeness control: compare the required ID set and count with the written destination set before allowing the completion marker, then reconcile the final set.",
      "adverse_test": "In an isolated agency-controlled test environment, make one required synthetic item produce an empty downstream result and assert that the package cannot be marked complete and that the missing ID is named.",
      "limitation": "Synthetic illustration only; not a customer incident. It proves neither how often this failure occurs nor that OutcomeTest would detect this or every defect in a real workflow."
    },
    {
      "case_id": "OT-LAB-004",
      "failure_class": "duplicate side effect",
      "title": "One request, two side effects",
      "scenario": "In this fictional task-creation scenario, the same synthetic request is retried after its first acknowledgement is delayed.",
      "business_invariant": "REQUEST-SYN-404 may create exactly one durable task for WORK-SYN-009, regardless of retry or acknowledgement timing.",
      "technical_status": "RUN: GREEN — every configured technical step reported success; no unhandled error was recorded.",
      "synthetic_input": {
        "request_id": "REQUEST-SYN-404",
        "work_item_id": "WORK-SYN-009",
        "requested_effect": "create one task",
        "delivery": "original request plus one identical retry"
      },
      "expected_result": "Exactly one durable task exists; the retry creates no second task and resolves to the original task reference.",
      "actual_result": "TASK-SYN-901 and TASK-SYN-902 both exist for the same request and work item; both technical attempts report success.",
      "missing_control": "Idempotency-and-deduplication control: bind the side effect to the stable request ID and reconcile that no more than one durable task exists for that key.",
      "adverse_test": "In an isolated agency-controlled test environment, withhold the first acknowledgement and deliver the identical request again, then assert that exactly one durable task exists and the retry resolves to its reference.",
      "limitation": "Synthetic illustration only; not a customer incident. It proves neither how often this failure occurs nor that OutcomeTest would detect this or every defect in a real workflow."
    },
    {
      "case_id": "OT-LAB-005",
      "failure_class": "unauthorized or unsafe side effect",
      "title": "Draft request causes an unapproved publication",
      "scenario": "In this fictional catalog scenario, a synthetic change is permitted to create an internal draft but has not been approved for external publication.",
      "business_invariant": "CHANGE-SYN-031 must remain internal while approval_state is pending. No external publication state may change without an approval bound to that change and action.",
      "technical_status": "RUN: GREEN — every configured technical step reported success; no unhandled error was recorded.",
      "synthetic_input": {
        "change_id": "CHANGE-SYN-031",
        "approval_state": "pending",
        "requested_action": "prepare internal draft",
        "permitted_scope": "internal draft only"
      },
      "expected_result": "The internal draft is prepared, published remains false, and no external state changes.",
      "actual_result": "The internal draft is prepared and published becomes true even though approval remains pending; the technical run still reports success.",
      "missing_control": "Authorization control: deny the external side effect unless a current approval is explicitly bound to CHANGE-SYN-031 and the publish action, and verify that condition immediately before mutation.",
      "adverse_test": "In an isolated agency-controlled test environment, exercise missing, pending, revoked, and wrong-change approvals and assert that every variant leaves external publication state unchanged and records a safe rejection.",
      "limitation": "Synthetic illustration only; not a customer incident. It proves neither how often this failure occurs nor that OutcomeTest would detect this or every defect in a real workflow."
    }
  ]
}