Can an A2A client resume a completed task by sending it another message
Can an A2A client resume a completed task by sending it another message?
The captured specification rejects messages to completed, failed, canceled or rejected tasks with UnsupportedOperationError. A task identifier does not reopen a terminal lifecycle. A separate follow-up must use a supported new-task or conversation path.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Do not resend work against a terminal task as if its old authority and state were resumable.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
May an A2A follow-up attach an existing task to a different conversation context
May an A2A follow-up attach an existing task to a different conversation context?
The captured specification requires deriving contextId from the task when only taskId is supplied and rejecting a message whose taskId and contextId refer to different contexts. Shared conversation intent is not sufficient to relabel an existing task.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Refuse cross-context continuation without a matching task-context pair.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Does reusing an A2A messageId guarantee that delegated work will not run twice
Does reusing an A2A messageId guarantee that delegated work will not run twice?
Send Message operations may be idempotent and an agent may use messageId to detect duplicates. The captured specification does not require universal deduplication of Send Message. Retrying an uncertain send therefore needs the receiving agent's actual deduplication and outcome evidence.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Do not authorize a consequential resend from messageId reuse alone.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Does every A2A streaming reply create a task that can later be polled
Does every A2A streaming reply create a task that can later be polled?
A message-only stream contains exactly one Message and then closes, with no task tracking or updates. A task-lifecycle stream starts with a Task and may then carry updates. The client must distinguish the returned shape before scheduling task retrieval.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Require an actual Task and its identifier before relying on later task-state polling.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Does a blocking A2A Send Message response prove the delegated task finished
Does a blocking A2A Send Message response prove the delegated task finished?
Section 3.2.2 of the captured A2A specification says returnImmediately false or unset waits for a terminal or interrupted state, including INPUT_REQUIRED or AUTH_REQUIRED. Its general Send Message paragraph separately says the operation returns immediately. This source tension leaves actual timing to be checked against the implemented version; neither paragraph supports treating every returned Task as completed.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Require the actual returned task state and implemented timing behavior; do not infer completion merely from a response or rely on an unqualified default-blocking claim.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Can an A2A client choose taskId as the identifier for creating new delegated work
Can an A2A client choose taskId as the identifier for creating new delegated work?
Task IDs are server-generated. A taskId in a message must reference an existing task, and an unknown one requires TaskNotFoundError. Client-generated task IDs for task creation are not supported in the captured specification.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Do not use a proposed taskId as a create-or-deduplicate key without a separate supported contract.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Must a repeated A2A cancellation return the same task object to be idempotent
Must a repeated A2A cancellation return the same task object to be idempotent?
The captured specification makes Cancel Task idempotent but permits TaskNotFoundError on a duplicate cancellation after the task was canceled and purged. Cancellation itself can fail for a noncancelable state. Preserve earlier responses and reconcile outcome rather than treating every later not-found as evidence of failed cancellation.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Do not infer rollback, original task outcome or a missing first cancellation solely from a later not-found response.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Does loading an ADK artifact by filename recover the exact version previously reviewed
Does loading an ADK artifact by filename recover the exact version previously reviewed?
Loading an ADK artifact without a version retrieves the latest version; specifying version N selects that version, and saving returns the assigned version. Retain the scoped filename and version for the exact reviewed output. Separately check the configured backend: the guide distinguishes temporary in-memory storage from persistent services such as GCS, so the version number alone does not establish restart durability.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Do not substitute the latest artifact for the version used by a prior review.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Is an ADK artifact named user:report.pdf isolated to the session that created it
Is an ADK artifact named user:report.pdf isolated to the session that created it?
The user: filename prefix scopes an artifact to app_name and user_id, allowing access or updates across that user's sessions in the app. A plain filename is session-scoped. The prefix changes the evidence-sharing boundary and is not merely a display name.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Do not claim session isolation for a user-scoped artifact without separate controls.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Does an ADK artifact_delta event contain the generated file needed for an acceptance review
Does an ADK artifact_delta event contain the generated file needed for an acceptance review?
The documented Python save example puts the artifact filename and assigned version in event.actions.artifact_delta. Artifact content is loaded separately through the artifact service. This event reference alone does not establish that the recipient retrieved or retained those bytes; other ADK languages can expose different API names.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Require retrieval of the referenced version and content before claiming delivery or content acceptance.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Does directly changing a fetched ADK Session.state reliably persist an auditable change
Does directly changing a fetched ADK Session.state reliably persist an auditable change?
The documentation distinguishes Context.state updates, which the framework tracks, from direct mutation of a Session retrieved from SessionService. The latter bypasses event tracking and can lose data. State updates should accompany an appended event.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Refuse durable-state or audit-history claims based solely on a mutated fetched Session object.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Is ADK temp: state a private durable store for each delegated sub-agent
Is ADK temp: state a private durable store for each delegated sub-agent?
Temporary state is scoped to the invocation and discarded when it completes. Parent and sub-agents sharing InvocationContext share the invocation ID and temp: state. It is neither a durable cross-invocation checkpoint nor automatically isolated per sub-agent.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Require an appropriate persisted scope and isolation evidence before using temp: values as recovery or agent-private evidence.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Does rewinding an ADK session restore shared user state and external side effects
Does rewinding an ADK session restore shared user state and external side effects?
The documented rewind restores only session-level state and artifacts. App-level and user-level resources are not restored, and external systems require separate restoration by the operator. A session rewind cannot establish that a purchase or shared resource change was undone.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Refuse full rollback claims without reconciling shared resources and external effects separately.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Can an ADK session rewind safely run while the session or its artifacts are still changing
Can an ADK session rewind safely run while the session or its artifacts are still changing?
State updates, artifact updates and event persistence are not one atomic transaction in the documented rewind. The guide advises avoiding active-session rewinds and concurrent artifact manipulation to prevent inconsistencies.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Require a quiescent recovery point and consistency checks before accepting the rewound snapshot.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Can ADK Resume repeat a tool whose remote side effect already occurred
Can ADK Resume repeat a tool whose remote side effect already occurred?
The resume guide reinstates successfully returned tool results and reruns an interrupted tool request. It explicitly describes at-least-once tool execution and possible repeat execution on resume. Side-effecting tools such as purchases need their own duplicate-prevention checks.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Do not resume an uncertain consequential tool without an outcome or deduplication check.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
May an operator add or remove ADK agents before resuming a stopped workflow
May an operator add or remove ADK agents before resuming a stopped workflow?
The captured ADK Resume guide does not support changing a stopped workflow before resumption, such as adding or removing agents. Resume selects the earlier invocation ID with the applicable app, user and session through the API server or Runner path; the guide says ADK Web and CLI resume are not currently supported. Retain the stopped invocation and workflow definition rather than assuming a fresh request or changed graph resumes the same work.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Require the applicable workflow definition before relying on recorded completion checkpoints.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Does wrapping a function in ADK LongRunningFunctionTool execute the long job for me
Does wrapping a function in ADK LongRunningFunctionTool execute the long job for me?
LongRunningFunctionTool manages the interaction with long-running work rather than performing the lengthy task itself; the guide recommends a separate server for substantial work. The runner pauses and the client supplies intermediate or final responses. In the Python example, the function-call ID correlates its response while the external ticket ID is tracked separately. Neither an interaction handle nor a ticket reference proves worker completion.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Do not treat creation of a long-running tool interaction as worker execution or completed work.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Does enabling ADK resumability automatically give a custom agent correct restart checkpoints
Does enabling ADK resumability automatically give a custom agent correct restart checkpoints?
The guide requires custom agents to define preservable steps and state, emit checkpoints for completed steps and mark overall completion with end_of_agent. Enabling resumability alone does not establish that a custom workflow implemented those checkpoints correctly.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Require custom step boundaries and saved completion events before accepting restart safety.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Can a failed input guardrail prove no OpenAI Agents SDK tool already ran
Can a failed input guardrail prove no OpenAI Agents SDK tool already ran?
Input guardrails run in parallel with the agent by default. The documentation says a tripwire can fire after token use or tool execution. Blocking mode runs the guardrail first and prevents agent execution if it trips. A failed parallel check is not evidence that earlier effects were avoided.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Require the execution mode and actual action record before claiming that a rejected input caused no effects.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Does an output guardrail tripwire leave the same session evidence as a guardrail exception
Does an output guardrail tripwire leave the same session evidence as a guardrail exception?
The captured Python SDK guide distinguishes output-tripwire rejection from a guardrail exception. A tripwire asks the configured session to retain replay-valid completed tool context while excluding rejected final output; rejected terminal-tool payloads can be replaced with a placeholder, or the response suffix discarded when safe sanitization is unavailable. A guardrail exception leaves the verdict unknown and requests persistence of completed final-turn items; a session-write error takes precedence. Retained call metadata can still contain arguments.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Do not infer absent tool work from withheld output, assume rejected payloads are retained, or treat a guardrail exception as a rejection verdict. Inspect the actual session write and retained fields.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Does stopping the event consumer stop an OpenAI Agents SDK streaming run
Does stopping the event consumer stop an OpenAI Agents SDK streaming run?
The Python SDK background run and event consumer have separate lifetimes. Breaking the event loop or failing while handling an event can leave model and tool calls running; closing the iterator alone waits rather than requests cancellation. Cancellation while awaiting the next event does request run cancellation. The guide recommends explicit cancellation and draining cleanup when one consumer owns an early exit; none of this establishes rollback of earlier effects.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Require an explicit cancellation request and final cleanup evidence before assuming work stopped.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Does the last visible token mean an OpenAI Agents SDK streamed run is fully complete
Does the last visible token mean an OpenAI Agents SDK streamed run is fully complete?
The guide says completion requires the stream_events iterator to finish. Session persistence, approval bookkeeping or history compaction can continue after the final visible token. Inspect the final run state only after the iterator drains.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Do not acknowledge durable run completion based solely on the final token event.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Should a new user turn be appended immediately after an OpenAI after_turn cancellation
Should a new user turn be appended immediately after an OpenAI after_turn cancellation?
The captured Python SDK guide says after_turn cancellation lets the current turn finish. When manually continuing normalized input after a tool turn, rerun last_agent for the unfinished existing user turn. If new input arrives before that run resumes, convert the drained result to state, stage input and resume. Tool-approval interruptions also require draining and inspecting interruptions before resuming state; a stopped tool turn is not automatically a fresh completed user turn.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Refuse to treat a partially finished tool or approval turn as a fresh completed conversation turn.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Does advertising MCP Tasks once force all later tool calls to return task handles
Does advertising MCP Tasks once force all later tool calls to return task handles?
The optional 2026-07-28 Tasks extension requires the capability on each request. A server must not return CreateTaskResult without it, even after earlier declarations. With support declared, the server chooses per request between a direct result and a task; clients must handle both.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Require the current request capability and actual result shape before selecting a task-processing path.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
May a compliant MCP server return a task handle before tasks/get can find it
May a compliant MCP server return a task handle before tasks/get can find it?
The optional 2026-07-28 Tasks extension prohibits returning CreateTaskResult before durable creation such that tasks/get resolves. Eventually consistent implementations must wait for consistency before replying. This is a specification requirement, not evidence that a buyer's server meets it.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Treat an unresolvable newly returned task as unresolved implementation evidence, not successful completion.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Can an MCP task marked completed still contain an unsuccessful tool result
Can an MCP task marked completed still contain an unsuccessful tool result?
In the optional 2026-07-28 Tasks extension, completed includes tool results with isError true. Failed is reserved for execution JSON-RPC errors. A consumer must inspect the embedded original result as well as task status before accepting tool or business success.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Refuse a successful-action conclusion from completed alone when the tool result reports an error.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
May an MCP server reuse an inputRequests key for a different question later in a task
May an MCP server reuse an inputRequests key for a different question later in a task?
The optional 2026-07-28 Tasks extension requires input request keys to stay unique over the task lifetime and prohibits reusing a satisfied key for a later request. Clients should deduplicate repeated keys across polls. Stable keys bind responses to the intended request rather than a later substituted question.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Reject ambiguous request-key reuse before applying a delayed input response.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Does a successful tasks/update response prove the MCP task advanced or used my response
Does a successful tasks/update response prove the MCP task advanced or used my response?
The optional 2026-07-28 Tasks extension permits a tasks/update acknowledgement before processing is reflected in observable state. It recommends ignoring responses for unknown or already-satisfied input keys. Clients should continue observing the task after an update; the acknowledgement alone does not establish a particular transition or completion.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Require subsequently observed task state and matching input identity before claiming progress.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Does possessing an MCP task ID authorize later retrieval or input updates
Does possessing an MCP task ID authorize later retrieval or input updates?
The optional 2026-07-28 Tasks extension requires authentication and authorization checks on each task-related request. Task IDs need protection against guessing, and input requests retain the ordinary elicitation or sampling trust model. A task handle is not a higher-trust channel or an access grant.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Require current caller permission and ordinary input checks before using a known task handle.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Does requesting MCP task notifications establish that every requested task ID was subscribed
Does requesting MCP task notifications establish that every requested task ID was subscribed?
In the optional 2026-07-28 Tasks extension, the acknowledgement lists the task IDs the server agreed to notify, if any. Notifications carry the complete current DetailedTask and final result, so clients may continue polling but need not. Compare the acknowledgement with requested IDs before relying on notification coverage; neither subscription nor a current-state notification supplies a promised replay of every historical transition.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Require acknowledgement for the intended task IDs and an observed outcome; do not impose the obsolete mandatory-polling rule or infer complete event history.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Can an agent dispute a Stripe Issuing authorization before the merchant captures it
Can an agent dispute a Stripe Issuing authorization before the merchant captures it?
Stripe's Issuing guide says an authorization cannot be disputed. A dispute can be filed after authorization completes and the acquiring business captures the transaction; reversal of an authorization is at the acquiring business's discretion. Identify the captured transaction before choosing dispute recovery.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Do not represent an authorization-only hold as an eligible captured-transaction dispute.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Can an automated Stripe Issuing dispute submit now and add evidence later
Can an automated Stripe Issuing dispute submit now and add evidence later?
Stripe permits submitting a dispute only once. After submission, the dispute cannot be edited or supplemented with further evidence. Incomplete or invalid submissions can lose, so the review point is before submission rather than after creation.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Require complete reason-specific evidence and operator authorization before the irreversible submission step.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Does saving or creating a Stripe Issuing dispute prove it was sent to the card network
Does saving or creating a Stripe Issuing dispute prove it was sent to the card network?
The documented workflow creates a dispute on Save and submits it on Submit; the API also separates creation and submission. Evidence fields may be absent during creation while evidence is collected. A created dispute object is therefore not proof of a submitted network challenge.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Require submission status or response before reporting a dispute as sent.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Does an available Stripe Issuing provisional credit establish a won dispute and final recovery
Does an available Stripe Issuing provisional credit establish a won dispute and final recovery?
For the documented eligible UK and EU Issuing unauthorized or fraud flows, provisional credit can be spent while the dispute remains open. Stripe claws it back after resolving the dispute; a win produces a new credit for the amount recovered. A clawback can create a negative balance requiring replenishment. Reconcile provisional credit, reversal and any final credit separately instead of treating available funds as final recovery.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Do not classify provisional funds as final recovery or extend this policy to every Issuing dispute or region.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Should an Issuing dispute always claim the original full transaction amount
Should an Issuing dispute always claim the original full transaction amount?
The creation guide defaults the Dispute Amount to the full transaction but directs users to account for refunds and cases where only a partial amount should be disputed. The amount to challenge must be reconciled against the actual unresolved portion.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Require refund and partial-fulfilment reconciliation before accepting the default amount.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review
Can an agent classify a disputed purchase as a consumer dispute without a merchant resolution attempt
Can an agent classify a disputed purchase as a consumer dispute without a merchant resolution attempt?
For consumer reasons such as not received, canceled or not as described, Stripe's guide requires the cardholder to attempt resolution with the business and include documentation of that attempt. This is a specific submission evidence condition, not proof of fraud or a guaranteed recovery.
Documentation reviewed 2026-10-30. Primary source.
Boundaries
- Require the applicable reason and documented merchant-resolution attempt before this consumer-dispute path.
- Buyer implementation, live runtime enforcement, settled payment, verified deletion or certification are not established.
- No expanded capabilities or licences for existing INDEX executables.
Complete record JSON · Exact free preview JSON · Source review