agentleFS
peterbamuhigirepeterbamuhigire/chwezi-dev-engine/skills/finance-accounting/electronic-fiscal-taxing/SKILL.md

electronic-fiscal-taxing

Skill31 starsChanged 18 days agoMITView on GitHub

Use when implementing or reviewing electronic fiscal taxation integrations in web, ERP, POS, or mobile-backed systems; covers jurisdiction adapters, tenant-scoped tax identities, API security, queues, offline operation, fiscal evidence, and Uganda EFRIS as the detailed reference.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

7 rules. About 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈7

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Do not use for tax-law interpretation without the accounting doctrine and current source register, for generic payment integrations, or for …

    line 44
  2. Distinctive:

    If the technical pack or credentials are absent, build contracts and test fixtures only.

    line 60
  3. Distinctive:

    Every fiscal side effect has a stable tenant-scoped idempotency key.

    line 85
  4. Distinctive:

    Define the domain port: Use provider-neutral commands/results for fiscalise, query, correct, cancel, sync catalogue, and reconcile.

    line 116
  5. Distinctive:

    Build durable state: Add additive schema changes, unique keys, immutable evidence, outbox claims, retry policy, dead-letter, replay …

    line 124
  6. Distinctive:

    Implement adapter: Keep EFRIS cryptography, envelope, dictionary IDs, endpoint, and response parsing inside the Uganda adapter.

    line 127
  7. Distinctive:

    Verify and release: Run unit, contract, integration, failure, isolation, offline, load, security, migration, UAT, and rollback checks.

    line 132

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Electronic Fiscal Taxing

This engineering skill builds the software boundary between a commercial system and an electronic fiscal authority. It supports one-client deployments and multi-tenant systems without mixing tax identities, credentials, devices, catalogues, queues, or evidence. It is general by design; Uganda EFRIS is the detailed reference implementation.

<!-- dual-compat-start -->

Prerequisites

Load system-architecture-design, api-design-first, database-design-engineering, distributed-systems-patterns, reliability-engineering, observability-monitoring, and vibe-security-skill as applicable. For accounting, tax, or statutory output, also load the external chwezi-accounting-doctrine electronic fiscal taxing skill and the finance quality gate.

Use When

  • An ERP, POS, billing, e-commerce, or mobile-backed system must fiscalise invoices, receipts, credit notes, debit notes, or cancellations.
  • A provider requires signed/encrypted requests, device registration, rotating keys, acknowledgements, or authority-specific dictionaries.
  • A system must support multiple tenants, each with a distinct TIN/tax ID, fiscal profile, branch/device mapping, and credentials.
  • A remote fiscal service needs an outbox, idempotent retries, dead-letter, replay, reconciliation, or controlled offline mode.
  • A mobile client needs fiscal status and receipt artefacts without direct access to authority credentials.

Do Not Use When

Do not use for tax-law interpretation without the accounting doctrine and current source register, for generic payment integrations, or for visual receipt/UI styling without the design engine. Do not call a third-party fiscal API directly from an untrusted browser or mobile client.

Inputs

ArtifactRequiredProduced by
Context map and critical flowsyessystem architecture
Source system schema and writersyesdatabase/POS audit
Jurisdiction technical pack and source registeryesauthority/onboarding owner
Tenant and identity modelyes for SaaSSaaS/security architecture
API consumers and latency/failure budgetyesproduct/operations
Accounting/tax mappingyes where financialaccounting doctrine/controller

If the technical pack or credentials are absent, build contracts and test fixtures only; block production activation and mark the gap explicitly.

Outputs

  • jurisdiction-neutral fiscal port and adapter contract;
  • tenant/client fiscal-profile and isolation map;
  • versioned API/OpenAPI and error/idempotency contract;
  • schema and expand-contract migration plan;
  • canonical fiscal-document builder and validation rules;
  • outbox/queue/retry/dead-letter/replay/reconciliation design;
  • security, secrets, audit, observability, runbook, rollback, and UAT pack;
  • client/mobile read model that exposes status and authority artefacts safely.

Acceptance requires executable or recorded contract evidence, negative tenant tests, duplicate/replay tests, redacted evidence, rollback instructions, and an explicit release state.

Non-negotiables

  1. The authenticated session or service context determines tenant scope; never accept tenant_id, TIN, or fiscal profile from a request body/query as the authority for routing.
  2. A single-client deployment may use an implicit profile, but the same profile interface must exist so it can be isolated later.
  3. Every fiscal side effect has a stable tenant-scoped idempotency key. A timeout is an unknown result; reconcile before retrying.
  4. Store raw authority responses only under explicit retention and redaction rules. Never log private keys, tokens, passwords, or symmetric keys.
  5. Provider FDN/verification/QR artefacts are persisted atomically with the fiscal result and are never fabricated by a fake client in production.
  6. Online, authority-approved offline, manual exception, rejected, and disabled states are distinct. Offline is bounded by current authority rules.
  7. A queue is at-least-once unless the provider proves otherwise. Workers must be concurrency-safe, bounded, observable, replayable, and quarantine poison messages.
  8. A mobile app consumes ERP fiscal projections; it does not contain URA credentials/private keys or become a second fiscalisation writer.

Decision Rules

SituationChooseFailure avoided
One legal entity, one deploymentOne profile behind the common interfaceHard-coded identity that cannot evolve
Shared SaaS schemaTenant-scoped rows, composite uniqueness/indexes, trusted contextCross-tenant submission
Strong tenant boundary requiredSchema/database isolation with profile resolverCredential/data contamination
Immediate fiscal response requiredSynchronous adapter within bounded timeout, then durable unknown stateFalse success or duplicate retry
Bursty/slow providerTransactional outbox and workerLost side effects and blocked checkout
Offline permitted by authorityIsolated local/enabler store with deadline and upload auditUnlimited unfiscalised backlog
Technical contract not currentContract tests and blocked adapter activationProduction protocol drift

Core Workflow

  1. Inventory writers and ownership. Find every invoice, receipt, payment, stock, correction, print, queue, and mobile sync path; select one canonical fiscalisation hook.
  2. Define the domain port. Use provider-neutral commands/results for fiscalise, query, correct, cancel, sync catalogue, and reconcile. Preserve provider codes and payload hashes alongside normalized states.
  3. Prove identity isolation. Resolve tenant/profile from trusted auth, validate branch/device/product ownership, and test wrong-tenant requests as indistinguishable not-found outcomes.
  4. Design contract first. Specify request/response schemas, auth, version, time, idempotency, rate limits, errors, telemetry, and consumer projections.
  5. Build durable state. Add additive schema changes, unique keys, immutable evidence, outbox claims, retry policy, dead-letter, replay authorization, and retention.
  6. Implement adapter. Keep EFRIS cryptography, envelope, dictionary IDs, endpoint, and response parsing inside the Uganda adapter; do not leak them through domain or mobile APIs.
  7. Integrate commercial paths. Route POS, manual, order, and agent sales through the canonical service; preserve accounting/stock transaction truth.
  8. Verify and release. Run unit, contract, integration, failure, isolation, offline, load, security, migration, UAT, and rollback checks. Activate only after current source-register and authority onboarding gates pass.
  9. Kaizen. Record the baseline, smallest experiment, evidence, standardised learning, owner, rollback, and next re-measurement in the engine.

Anti-Patterns

  • Direct URA calls from Android or browser code. Fix: ERP gateway and safe read-only projection.
  • Client-supplied tenant/TIN routing. Fix: derive profile from verified context.
  • One global AES/key cache or offline store. Fix: tenant/profile-scoped key and device lifecycle with explicit isolation tests.
  • New idempotency key after timeout. Fix: reconcile and reuse the original key.
  • Storing the authority's fiscal number in the tenant's invoice-number column, or letting it advance the tenant counter. Fix: keep the fiscal number in its own column; the tenant series stays contiguous (tenant-document-numbering).
  • FakeEfrisClient in production wiring. Fix: fail closed unless a configured, authorized adapter is selected.
  • Storing only normalized status. Fix: retain redacted provider code/message, hashes, version, and attempt evidence.
  • Retrying validation or authorization failures. Fix: classify deterministic, transient, unknown, and manual-review outcomes.
  • Adding tenant_id to a table without backfill/index/rollback evidence. Fix: use expand-contract and prove zero unowned rows before enforcement.

Read Next

  • chwezi-accounting-doctrine electronic fiscal taxing for tax and ledger rules
  • api-design-first, database-design-engineering, distributed-systems-patterns, and reliability-engineering
  • multi-tenant-saas-architecture, saas-erp-system-design, and pos-sales-operations-engineering
  • android-development (including its persistence and TDD guidance) for downstream mobile projections

References

  • Architecture and tenant isolation
  • Adapter, API, and queue contract
  • Uganda EFRIS source register
  • Uganda EFRIS interface catalogue
  • Uganda offline and device deployment
  • Testing, observability, and release
  • ERP mapping example

Evidence Produced

CategoryArtifactFormatExample
CorrectnessFiscal document reconciliationMarkdown/CSVsource transaction, fiscal request, authority response, retry, cancellation, ledger link, and exception
<!-- dual-compat-end -->

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.