Implement Integration Config Validator core logic
epic-external-system-integration-configuration-core-services-task-002 — Build the IntegrationConfigValidator service that validates integration configuration completeness and consistency before any save operation. Must validate required credential fields per integration type, field mapping completeness, sync schedule validity, and cross-field constraints. Returns structured validation errors with field-level detail.
Acceptance Criteria
Technical Requirements
Execution Context
Tier 1 - 540 tasks
Can start after Tier 0 completes
Handles integration between different epics or system components. Requires coordination across multiple development streams.
Implementation Notes
Keep the validator purely functional — validate(IntegrationConfig config) → ValidationResult. Do not inject Supabase or any async dependency. Use a list of private validator functions that each accept the config and return List
For cron validation, implement a minimal cron parser that checks for 5 or 6 fields and that each field matches its allowed range/pattern — do not pull in a heavy dependency for this. Expose the validator as a Riverpod Provider so BLoC/Cubit classes can inject it without manual instantiation. The validation errors should be designed for direct display in the UI — use clear, user-facing English messages like 'API key is required for Xledger integration' rather than technical codes alone.
Testing Requirements
Unit tests using flutter_test. Organize tests by validation rule: one describe block per rule. Required tests: (1) fully valid Xledger config passes, (2) fully valid Dynamics config passes, (3) each required credential field missing individually for each integration type, (4) unknown integration type, (5) invalid cron expression (multiple malformed strings), (6) sync_enabled=true with missing schedule, (7) field mapping with empty source, (8) field mapping with empty target, (9) field mapping is null/absent and not flagged as error. All tests must be synchronous (no async).
Aim for 100% branch coverage on the validate() method.
Each of the five external systems (Xledger, Dynamics, Cornerstone, Consio, Bufdir) has a different authentication flow, field schema, and error format. Forcing them into a uniform adapter interface may require compromises that result in leaky abstractions or make the adapter contract too complex to maintain.
Mitigation & Contingency
Mitigation: Design the IntegrationAdapter interface with a loose invoke() payload rather than a typed one, allowing each adapter to declare its own input/output schema. Use integration type metadata in the registry to document per-adapter quirks. Build Xledger first as the most documented API, then adapt the interface based on learnings.
Contingency: If the uniform interface cannot accommodate all five systems, split into two interface tiers: a simple polling/export adapter and a richer bidirectional adapter, with the registry declaring which tier each system implements.
Development and testing of the Cornerstone and Consio adapters depends on NHF providing sandbox API access. If credentials or documentation are delayed, these adapters cannot be validated, blocking the epic's acceptance criteria.
Mitigation & Contingency
Mitigation: Implement Xledger and Dynamics adapters first (better-documented, sandbox available). Create a mock adapter for Cornerstone/Consio using recorded API responses for CI testing. Proactively request sandbox access from NHF at project kickoff.
Contingency: Ship the epic with Cornerstone/Consio adapters in a 'stub' state (connectivity test returns a simulated success, invoke() is not production-wired) and gate the NHF integration behind a feature flag until real API access is obtained.
Real-world field mappings may include nested transformations, conditional logic, and data type coercions (e.g., Norwegian date formats, currency rounding rules) that the Field Mapping Resolver's initial design does not accommodate, requiring scope expansion mid-epic.
Mitigation & Contingency
Mitigation: Gather actual field mapping examples from Blindeforbundet (Xledger) and HLF (Dynamics) before designing the resolver. Identify the most complex transformation required and ensure the resolver design handles it. Limit Phase 1 to direct field renaming and format conversion only.
Contingency: If complex transformations are required, implement a simple expression evaluator (e.g., JSONata or a custom mini-DSL) as an extension point in the resolver, delivering basic mappings first and complex ones in a follow-up task.