Add SCM functional knowledge domain

.github/scripts/Test-SkillIndex.ps1

@@ -93,14 +93,15 @@ try {
         'microsoft/skills/review/al-query-review.md',
         'microsoft/skills/review/al-reporting-review.md',
         'microsoft/skills/review/al-appsource-review.md',
-        'microsoft/skills/review/al-telemetry-review.md'
+        'microsoft/skills/review/al-telemetry-review.md',
+        'microsoft/skills/review/al-scm-review.md'
     )
     $review = @($skills | Where-Object id -eq 'al-code-review')
     if ($review.Count -ne 1) {
         throw "Expected exactly one al-code-review record, found $($review.Count)."
     }
     if ((@($review[0].subSkills) -join "`n") -cne ($expectedLeaves -join "`n")) {
-        throw 'al-code-review subSkills did not preserve the declared 17-leaf order.'
+        throw "al-code-review subSkills did not preserve the declared $($expectedLeaves.Count)-leaf order."
     }
     foreach ($leafPath in $expectedLeaves) {
         $leaf = @($skills | Where-Object path -ceq $leafPath)
@@ -238,4 +239,4 @@ finally {
     Remove-Item -LiteralPath $tmp -Recurse -Force -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue
 }
 
-Write-Output 'Skill-index check PASSED: deterministic, schema-valid, and all 17 review leaves preserved in order.'
+Write-Output "Skill-index check PASSED: deterministic, schema-valid, and all $($expectedLeaves.Count) review leaves preserved in order."

README.md

@@ -76,17 +76,20 @@ the review can still discover knowledge by reading the folders.
 
 ## Scope
 
-Today's curated content focuses on **technical AL code review**. It augments
+Today's curated content covers **technical AL code review** and a focused
+**Supply Chain Management (SCM)** functional domain. It augments
 the agent's judgment; it is not an exhaustive BC manual or a substitute for
 compilation, analyzers, tests, or human review. See
 [coverage and limits](docs/using-bcquality.md#coverage-and-limits) for the
 available domains and the difference between a folder review and a comparison.
 Mechanical issues already enforced by the AL compiler or standard analyzers are
 intentionally left to those deterministic tools rather than duplicated here.
 
-Functional areas such as Finance, Supply Chain Management, Manufacturing, Jobs,
-Warehousing, and Service, and technologies such as PowerShell, pipelines, and
-Power Platform, remain valid future scope, **not current coverage claims**.
+The [SCM domain](microsoft/knowledge/scm/) covers selected inventory, costing,
+reservation, tracking, and warehouse/posting workflows, not exhaustive supply
+chain validation. Broader functional coverage such as Finance, Manufacturing,
+Jobs, and Service, and technologies such as PowerShell, pipelines, and Power
+Platform, remain valid future scope, **not current coverage claims**.
 
 ## What's in this repo
 

docs/using-bcquality.md

@@ -85,6 +85,7 @@ branch names with ones in your project.
 | Uncommitted changes | Use the installed al-code-review skill to review my staged and unstaged tracked changes against HEAD, without changing files. Identify any untracked AL files not included in that diff. |
 | Branch changes | Use the installed al-code-review skill to review changes on this branch since its merge base with `origin/main`. Exclude uncommitted changes and do not edit files. |
 | Focused review | Use the installed al-code-review skill to review performance in the app in this folder, without changing files. Return the complete performance findings report. |
+| Supply chain code | Use the installed al-code-review skill to review SCM posting, inventory, reservations, item tracking, and warehouse workflows in this app folder, without changing files. Return the complete Supply Chain Management findings report. |
 | Agent SDK code | Use the installed al-code-review skill to review Agent SDK implementation and usage in this app folder, without changing files. Return the complete Agents findings report. |
 
 For Git comparisons, the named base ref must exist locally. If it is missing,
@@ -183,7 +184,7 @@ using your normal compilation, analyzer, test, and human-review workflow.
 
 ## Coverage and limits
 
-The Microsoft broad review composes the 17 Microsoft domains listed below.
+The Microsoft broad review composes the Microsoft domains listed below.
 The Community Agents review is a separate skill selected by the request, not
 a nested part of that coordinator. All current review leaves accept app
 folders, files, and diffs; request an Agent SDK review explicitly when that
@@ -193,8 +194,22 @@ Available knowledge is **not** a promise that every rule will run. Selection
 depends on the task, target context, enabled layers, and source evidence.
 A whole-folder review is a current-state snapshot: detecting a published API
 removal or another comparison-only regression requires an actual baseline.
-The corpus is technical AL guidance, not exhaustive functional validation or
-AppSource certification.
+The corpus combines technical AL guidance with targeted functional-domain
+invariants, not exhaustive functional validation or AppSource certification.
+
+The SCM leaf owns selected inventory/value, application, reservation, tracking,
+and warehouse/posting invariants. It prunes unrelated AL using the actual
+tables, codeunits, fields, and operations in scope; an item caption or a broad
+`ApplicationArea` alone is not an SCM review signal. Missing workflow context
+must not be replaced with an assumed posting defect. Manufacturing, assembly,
+planning, and other supply-chain areas are covered only where an article
+explicitly names the shared interface or invariant.
+
+SCM owns Item/Value/Capacity/Warehouse and inventory-application posting
+records. Pure G/L, customer/vendor/detailed/VAT and financial-only posting
+mutations belong to Finance, even when that domain is not enabled. Equivalent
+findings for one inventory-originated posting bypass have one SCM primary
+owner; distinct independent financial defects remain separate.
 
 BCQuality intentionally does not duplicate mechanical diagnostics already
 enforced by the AL compiler or standard analyzers. Run the consuming app's
@@ -222,6 +237,7 @@ Each article describes one concern. Where samples exist, use its linked
 | Reporting | [Reporting](../microsoft/knowledge/reporting/) |
 | Security | [Security](../microsoft/knowledge/security/) |
 | Style | [Style](../microsoft/knowledge/style/) |
+| Supply Chain Management | [SCM](../microsoft/knowledge/scm/) |
 | Telemetry | [Telemetry](../microsoft/knowledge/telemetry/) |
 | Testing | [Testing](../microsoft/knowledge/testing/) |
 | User interface | [UI](../microsoft/knowledge/ui/) |

evaluation/README.md

@@ -6,6 +6,16 @@ The evaluation is convention-driven. The harness discovers every `<layer>/skills
 
 Model-facing preparation hashes case IDs, neutralizes `Good`/`Bad` object-name tokens, and removes full-line sample comments so neither the article slug, domain, nor expected outcome reveals the answer.
 
+The SCM `articles` override deliberately selects every rule in the initial
+functional domain, producing nine positive cases and nine clean controls.
+Business context is executable: document/status `TestField` guards,
+calculated-revaluation fields, source-transfer base quantities, warehouse
+reconciliation steps, and additional-demand promising parameters survive
+neutralization. Do not move those preconditions into comments or generic
+"posting" helper names; removing them can turn a real defect into a valid
+alternative workflow. The clean pairs exercise the supported APIs selected by
+the same routing cues, not merely unrelated code that contains no SCM tokens.
+
 ## Validate the corpus
 
 ```powershell

evaluation/review-fixtures.json

@@ -51,6 +51,19 @@
         "stop-when-runrequestpage-returns-empty-parameters"
       ]
     },
+    "scm": {
+      "articles": [
+        "post-item-ledger-changes-through-item-journals",
+        "post-revaluation-through-the-item-journal-batch",
+        "change-item-applications-through-posting-routines",
+        "cancel-reservations-through-reservation-management",
+        "transfer-item-tracking-through-source-reservation-codeunits",
+        "reconcile-warehouse-adjustments-with-the-item-ledger",
+        "post-transfers-through-shipment-and-receipt-codeunits",
+        "use-date-aware-availability-for-promising",
+        "carry-out-requisition-actions-through-the-standard-workflow"
+      ]
+    },
     "style": {
       "article": "label-comment-explains-placeholders"
     },

microsoft/knowledge/scm/cancel-reservations-through-reservation-management.bad.al

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+codeunit 50106 "SCM Cancel Reservation Bad"
+{
+    procedure CancelSalesReservation(ReservationEntryNo: Integer)
+    var
+        ReservationEntry: Record "Reservation Entry";
+    begin
+        ReservationEntry.Get(ReservationEntryNo, false);
+        ReservationEntry.TestField("Source Type", Database::"Sales Line");
+        ReservationEntry.TestField("Reservation Status", ReservationEntry."Reservation Status"::Reservation);
+
+        ReservationEntry.Delete(true);
+    end;
+}

microsoft/knowledge/scm/cancel-reservations-through-reservation-management.good.al

@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+codeunit 50107 "SCM Cancel Reservation Good"
+{
+    procedure CancelSalesReservation(ReservationEntryNo: Integer)
+    var
+        ReservationEntry: Record "Reservation Entry";
+        ReservationEngineMgt: Codeunit "Reservation Engine Mgt.";
+    begin
+        ReservationEntry.Get(ReservationEntryNo, false);
+        ReservationEntry.TestField("Source Type", Database::"Sales Line");
+        ReservationEntry.TestField("Reservation Status", ReservationEntry."Reservation Status"::Reservation);
+
+        ReservationEngineMgt.CancelReservation(ReservationEntry);
+    end;
+}

microsoft/knowledge/scm/cancel-reservations-through-reservation-management.md

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+---
+bc-version: [all]
+domain: scm
+keywords: [reservation-entry, cancelreservation, reservation-engine-mgt, reservation-status, order-tracking, disallow-cancellation]
+technologies: [al]
+countries: [w1]
+application-area: [all]
+---
+
+# Cancel reservations through reservation management
+
+## Description
+
+Persistent `"Reservation Entry"` rows are not disposable allocation markers. Reservation and Tracking links use an entry-number pair with opposite `Positive` values, while Surplus and Prospect entries can legitimately be unpaired. Cancelling a binding reservation must handle its counterpart and any remaining item tracking or order tracking, not just remove a row.
+
+## Best Practice
+
+Explicit cancellation of an existing binding reservation uses `"Reservation Engine Mgt.".CancelReservation`. It checks the reservation status and `"Disallow Cancellation"`, handles the counterpart, and preserves or retracks the remaining source quantities as appropriate. Source-line quantity changes have their own source-specific reservation management path.
+
+Not every Reservation Entry has a partner or identical lot/serial values on both sides: Surplus/Prospect entries and supported late-binding scenarios have different relationships. Temporary buffers, engine-owned updates, and supported publisher metadata are not independent cancellation. Cancelling a reservation is also different from intentionally removing an item-tracking assignment.
+
+The samples retrieve the negative side of a persistent sales-line reservation and cancel only the binding. They do not delete the sales line or remove its tracking specifications.
+
+See sample: [`cancel-reservations-through-reservation-management.good.al`](cancel-reservations-through-reservation-management.good.al).
+
+## Anti Pattern
+
+`Delete(true)`, `DeleteAll`, or a status/source rewrite on persistent `"Reservation Entry"` records does not perform binding-reservation cancellation. Even deleting both sides can discard tracking that should survive and omit retracking.
+
+Normal processing of temporary Prospect/Surplus buffers is outside that cancellation workflow, and an unpaired row is not intrinsically an orphan.
+
+See sample: [`cancel-reservations-through-reservation-management.bad.al`](cancel-reservations-through-reservation-management.bad.al).
+
+## References
+
+- [Reservation, order tracking, and action messaging](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dynamics365/business-central/design-details-reservation-order-tracking-and-action-messaging)
+- [Item tracking and reservations](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dynamics365/business-central/design-details-item-tracking-and-reservations)
+- [BaseApp reservation cancellation](https://github.com/microsoft/BCApps/blob/8f7a04cb0db8aa96cb97e055c45c61aead49e280/src/Layers/W1/BaseApp/Inventory/Tracking/ReservationEngineMgt.Codeunit.al#L51-L90)

microsoft/knowledge/scm/carry-out-requisition-actions-through-the-standard-workflow.bad.al

@@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
+codeunit 50116 "SCM Requisition Action Bad"
+{
+    procedure CarryOutAcceptedNewPurchase(TemplateName: Code[10]; BatchName: Code[10]; LineNo: Integer; OrderDate: Date; PostingDate: Date; ReceiptDate: Date; CutoffDate: Date)
+    var
+        RequisitionLine: Record "Requisition Line";
+        PurchaseHeader: Record "Purchase Header";
+        PurchaseLine: Record "Purchase Line";
+    begin
+        if (OrderDate = 0D) or (PostingDate = 0D) or (ReceiptDate = 0D) or (CutoffDate = 0D) then
+            Error(PlanningDatesErr);
+        RequisitionLine.Get(TemplateName, BatchName, LineNo);
+        RequisitionLine.TestField(Type, RequisitionLine.Type::Item);
+        RequisitionLine.TestField("Replenishment System", RequisitionLine."Replenishment System"::Purchase);
+        RequisitionLine.TestField("Action Message", RequisitionLine."Action Message"::New);
+        RequisitionLine.TestField("Accept Action Message", true);
+        RequisitionLine.TestField("Demand Type", Database::"Sales Line");
+        RequisitionLine.TestField("Demand Order No.");
+        RequisitionLine.TestField("Vendor No.");
+        RequisitionLine.SetRecFilter();
+
+        PurchaseHeader.Init();
+        PurchaseHeader."Document Type" := PurchaseHeader."Document Type"::Order;
+        PurchaseHeader.Insert(true);
+        PurchaseHeader.Validate("Buy-from Vendor No.", RequisitionLine."Vendor No.");
+        PurchaseHeader.Validate("Order Date", OrderDate);
+        PurchaseHeader.Validate("Posting Date", PostingDate);
+        PurchaseHeader.Validate("Expected Receipt Date", ReceiptDate);
+        PurchaseHeader.Modify(true);
+
+        PurchaseLine.Init();
+        PurchaseLine."Document Type" := PurchaseHeader."Document Type";
+        PurchaseLine."Document No." := PurchaseHeader."No.";
+        PurchaseLine."Line No." := 10000;
+        PurchaseLine.Validate(Type, PurchaseLine.Type::Item);
+        PurchaseLine.Validate("No.", RequisitionLine."No.");
+        PurchaseLine.Validate("Location Code", RequisitionLine."Location Code");
+        PurchaseLine.Validate("Variant Code", RequisitionLine."Variant Code");
+        PurchaseLine.Validate("Unit of Measure Code", RequisitionLine."Unit of Measure Code");
+        PurchaseLine.Validate(Quantity, RequisitionLine.Quantity);
+        PurchaseLine.Insert(true);
+
+        RequisitionLine.Delete(true);
+    end;
+
+    var
+        PlanningDatesErr: Label 'Supply explicit order, posting, receipt, and cutoff dates.';
+}

microsoft/knowledge/scm/carry-out-requisition-actions-through-the-standard-workflow.good.al

@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
+codeunit 50117 "SCM Requisition Action Good"
+{
+    procedure CarryOutAcceptedNewPurchase(TemplateName: Code[10]; BatchName: Code[10]; LineNo: Integer; OrderDate: Date; PostingDate: Date; ReceiptDate: Date; CutoffDate: Date)
+    var
+        RequisitionLine: Record "Requisition Line";
+        PurchaseHeaderDefaults: Record "Purchase Header";
+        ReqWkshMakeOrder: Codeunit "Req. Wksh.-Make Order";
+    begin
+        if (OrderDate = 0D) or (PostingDate = 0D) or (ReceiptDate = 0D) or (CutoffDate = 0D) then
+            Error(PlanningDatesErr);
+        RequisitionLine.Get(TemplateName, BatchName, LineNo);
+        RequisitionLine.TestField(Type, RequisitionLine.Type::Item);
+        RequisitionLine.TestField("Replenishment System", RequisitionLine."Replenishment System"::Purchase);
+        RequisitionLine.TestField("Action Message", RequisitionLine."Action Message"::New);
+        RequisitionLine.TestField("Accept Action Message", true);
+        RequisitionLine.TestField("Demand Type", Database::"Sales Line");
+        RequisitionLine.TestField("Demand Order No.");
+        RequisitionLine.TestField("Vendor No.");
+        RequisitionLine.SetRecFilter();
+
+        PurchaseHeaderDefaults."Order Date" := OrderDate;
+        PurchaseHeaderDefaults."Posting Date" := PostingDate;
+        PurchaseHeaderDefaults."Expected Receipt Date" := ReceiptDate;
+        ReqWkshMakeOrder.Set(PurchaseHeaderDefaults, CutoffDate, false);
+        ReqWkshMakeOrder.SetSuppressCommit(true);
+        ReqWkshMakeOrder.CarryOutBatchAction(RequisitionLine);
+    end;
+
+    var
+        PlanningDatesErr: Label 'Supply explicit order, posting, receipt, and cutoff dates.';
+}