Aglet

Investigate webhook tenant mapping

Investigation should show how one delivery acquired its tenant context. Build valid, missing, conflicting, similar-resource, and unknown-subscription fixtures, then trace the route before effects. Keep payload inference, cache state, subscription mapping, and authorization as separate hypotheses for one shared endpoint.

Build a useful investigation brief

  1. Build tenant fixtures

    Create two tenants with similar resource keys, valid mapping, missing tenant, conflicting tenant and resource, stale mapping, and unknown subscription cases. Record expected route and effect before execution. Keep subscription identity beside each fixture.

  2. Trace identity to write

    Capture endpoint and subscription labels, event ID, tenant extraction, resource lookup, authorization context, route, receipt, and local record. Compare first divergence between valid and ambiguous cases. Keep sensitive payloads out. Keep tenant evidence beside the authorization trace.

  3. Challenge routing fallbacks

    Vary only subscription, tenant field, resource key, cache, authorization, or event version. Compare quarantine and write outcomes. If source identity cannot be established, state the evidence gap rather than selecting a default tenant.

What to carry forward

The investigation is ready when fixtures show tenant identity, resource lookup, authorization, route, and write boundaries. Deliver a scoped mapping or quarantine change. Keep unknown subscription and ownership evidence explicit. Keep ownership evidence explicit for review.

Technical background: GitHub documentation.

Keep the decision with the work.

Use a Work Item in Aglet to record the problem, the evidence you have, and the next decision. Add an owner and priority, then keep updates in the discussion so the next person can follow the reasoning.

Create an account See the product workflow