Gambit Stream / Review brief
Wallet Integration: Keep Unknown Outcomes Unresolved
A timeout tells you the response was unavailable. It does not establish whether the wallet operation took effect. Keep the operation identity attached to the investigation.
Original editorial worksheet · Updated
- Use it for
- Scope wallet, crypto payment and casino payment-provider integration evidence.
- Output
- A blank, editable record with evidence fields and ownership.
- Tool behavior
- The CSV is a static download. No project details are requested or submitted.
Set the boundary before comparing
Name the balance authority and distinguish its records from the game or payment provider's records. Document the operation identity used at each boundary. A retry must follow the actual contract; changing an identifier can change the meaning of the request. The worksheet does not prescribe a universal retry policy.
Record success, failure and unknown outcomes separately. For an unknown result, identify the authoritative status lookup and the receiving owner. Corrections need their own identity and a reference to the original operation. Review duplicate handling and correction behavior as separate scenarios.
The evidence record
Use one row per review area. The role is a starting point; assign a named owner in your project. Attach a sanitized reference and retain unresolved questions until a reviewer has a supported answer.
| Review area | Evidence to attach | Suggested role |
|---|---|---|
| Authority | Balance writer and authoritative status source | Wallet owner |
| Identity | Caller, provider and ledger identifiers | Integration owner |
| Duplicate | Same-request contract and reviewed evidence | Test owner |
| Unknown result | Lookup, investigation owner and escalation rule | Support owner |
| Correction | Original reference, permitted transition and evidence | Ledger owner |
| Reconciliation | Comparison inputs and unresolved-item disposition | Reviewer |
The CSV adds assigned owner, evidence reference, status, unresolved question and review date columns. Every row starts as draft.
A fictional example
A fictional debit has a provider request ID but no observable response. The record should preserve that ID and point to the authoritative investigation. Marking the response "failed" and creating another debit is not a conclusion this worksheet can justify.
Use the record in a review
- Obtain the applicable provider contract and environment version.
- Record the expected state transition for each test scenario.
- Attach sanitized evidence references and responsible owners.
- Use the eight-field worksheet on this site to inspect documentation gaps before handoff.
Download the blank CSV and keep the completed version with your project records.
Source and limits
The download is a draft record, not a transaction tool. It cannot inspect a ledger, authorize a retry or validate a payment integration. Keep signing secrets and payment credentials out of the record.
AWS Builders' Library: Making retries safe with idempotent APIs. Explains the relationship between repeated requests and the caller's intent; it does not define a casino wallet protocol.
Source reviewed 9 November 2026. The suggested fields are this site's editorial method, not an external certification standard.