Test filing a dispute and the case reference it creates

The flow under test

A dispute form fails in a way that is worse than most failures, because the customer believes it worked.

• The wrong transaction is disputed - the form opens against a neighbouring row rather than the one selected.
• The reason is not captured - the case is created without the category that determines how it is handled.
• No reference is issued - the customer has a confirmation message and nothing to quote later.

The test asserts the transaction id and the amount before the dispute is filed, which is what ties the case to the correct payment. Filing against the wrong transaction produces a valid-looking case that helps nobody.

The test file

The reason is selected from the dropdown and the free text detail is typed, because a dispute category without supporting detail is handled differently by whoever reviews it.

---
mode: testing
url: https://my-testing-repo-main.vercel.app/paypal-clone-app/activity?reset=true
max_steps: 45
tags: [paypal, payments, disputes]
---

# PayPaal 10.4: Dispute filing

Catalog objective: open a transaction and start a dispute with a reason.
Key assertion: a dispute case is created with a reference id.

## Open the transaction
Click "Details" on the "Brightline Electronics" row and verify the transaction detail shows "Transaction" of "TX-9920" and "Amount" of "$128.40".

## Choose a reason
Select "I did not receive the item" in "What went wrong?" and type "Tracking has said out for delivery for nine days." into the detail box.

## File the dispute
Click "File dispute" and verify a green banner titled "Dispute filed" shows the case "PP-D-5500" for Brightline Electronics at "$128.40".

## Verify the case reference is recorded
Verify a "Dispute" card shows "Case reference" of "PP-D-5500", "Reason" of "I did not receive the item" and a status of "Under review".

The final assertion checks three things about the case: its reference, the reason it records, and a status of under review. A case that exists with the wrong reason is a slower resolution rather than a faster one.

Step by step coverage

The four steps track the case from the payment it concerns to the reference the customer walks away with.

Asserting the amount on the created case, and not only on the transaction, is what catches a dispute filed for a partial or incorrect figure.

Running it

kane-cli testmd run tests/paypal/dispute-filing_test.md

The result is coverage on a trust-critical flow, checked to the point where the customer receives something they can quote back.

Support and dispute tooling is worth testing on both sides, since the agent view and the customer view read the same case. Kane CLI as a QA agent covers building that out, and running flows in CI covers scheduling them.