fix(disputes): shared Agreement side effects for dispute status changes

[naninu123]

Summary

Closes #58.

Dispute-driven Agreement status changes now go through the same side-effect path as normal Agreement updates:

• AgreementActivityService — single shared writer for agreement_activity (replaces 3 private logActivity copies in Agreements / Disputes / Webhooks)
• AgreementsService.applyStatusChange — shared status update + activity log (status_changed_to_* with {status, from, to}) + domain events (FUNDED / COMPLETED)
• DisputesService open / resolve / cancel call applyStatusChange then log dispute-specific actions (dispute_opened, dispute_resolved, dispute_cancelled)
• Dispute-specific DISPUTE_OPENED / DISPUTE_RESOLVED emits kept

Acceptance criteria

AC	Status
Unit: dispute open/resolve emit expected domain events + activity logs	✅
Integration: end-to-end dispute → Agreement update still works	✅ migrated-flows
Parity: dispute-driven vs normal updateStatus share status_changed_to_* shape	✅
Regression: listByWallet creator+participant scoping unchanged	✅

Test plan

• npm test — 280 passed
• npx tsc --noEmit — clean
• npm run lint — 0 errors (pre-existing warnings only)
• New: agreement-activity.service.spec.ts, dispute-side-effects.spec.ts
• Updated: agreement-lifecycle.spec.ts, webhooks.spec.ts, integration DI

Notes

No public API / DTO / route changes. Backward compatible.

[vercel]

@naninu123 is attempting to deploy a commit to the ManuelJG's projects Team on Vercel.

A member of the Team first needs to authorize it.

[Kalchaqui]

Review — LGTM (rebase before merge)

Solid fix for #58. Scope matches the issue: shared activity logging + dispute status changes go through a common side-effect path, without public API churn.

What looks good

• AgreementActivityService consolidates the 3 private logActivity copies (Agreements / Disputes / Webhooks).
• DisputesService open / resolve / cancel call applyStatusChange then still emit DISPUTE_OPENED / DISPUTE_RESOLVED (notifications stay wired).
• Dispute-specific activity actions (dispute_opened, dispute_resolved, dispute_cancelled) preserved alongside status_changed_to_*.
• listByWallet untouched.
• New unit coverage in dispute-side-effects.spec.ts / agreement-activity.service.spec.ts is meaningful.

Before merge

1. Please rebase on current main — branch is ~8 commits behind (includes dispute-milestone + KYB). Re-run npm test after rebase.

Non-blocking nits (optional)

• Check applyStatusChange { success } before emitting dispute events / returning, so a failed Agreement update does not leave a dispute row + notification with a stale Agreement status.
• updateStatus still duplicates the apply path; later could delegate to applyStatusChange for full DRY (not required for Ensure dispute-driven Agreement changes trigger notifications & activity logs #58).

After rebase + green tests, this is good to merge from my side.

[naninu123]

Rebased on current main. Ready for re-review.

[Kalchaqui]

Re-review after rebase

Thanks @naninu123 — confirmed force-push 67f1030 and the #58 design still looks right (AgreementActivityService + applyStatusChange + dispute activity/events).

CI on this SHA: Test / Lint / Build / Format green (Vercel fail expected).

Blocker for merge right now

GitHub reports merge conflicts with main in:

• src/agreements/agreements.service.ts
• src/disputes/disputes.service.ts

Please rebase/resolve and push again before we merge.

Maintainer note (also relevant)

This PR overlaps open #104 (activity logging + previous_state / new_state). Prefer merge #100 first once conflicts are clear, then rebase #104 onto the shared AgreementActivityService.

Optional nit (still non-blocking)

Check applyStatusChange { success } before emitting dispute events.

Happy to give a final LGTM as soon as conflicts are resolved and CI is green again.

[naninu123]

Rebased + conflicts resolved

@Kalchaqui force-pushed rebased branch onto current main (includes #104).

Conflict resolution

• Kept shared AgreementActivityService + applyStatusChange path from this PR
• Merged feat(agreements): extend activity logging with previous/new state + dispute events (#61) #104 previous_state / new_state into AgreementActivityService.logActivity (optional 5th arg)
• Dropped private logActivity / logAgreementActivity duplicates in AgreementsService
• Dispute open/resolve/cancel → applyStatusChange then dispute-specific activity with state fields
• Maintainer nit: check applyStatusChange { success } before emitting dispute events — done

Verify

• jest full suite: 345 passed
• Prettier: clean
• ESLint on touched files: 0 errors (pre-existing warnings only)
• Build: green

Ready for final LGTM / merge.

[Kalchaqui]

Re-review — LGTM

Thanks @naninu123 — cb08d30 clears the prior merge conflicts and cleanly folds #104 previous_state / new_state into AgreementActivityService + dispute side-effects.

Design for #58 still looks right (applyStatusChange + shared activity writer + dispute-specific actions/events). Early-return on failed status update is in place.

Merge-ready once CI is green on this SHA (Vercel auth fail expected / ignore).