Which FR10 receipt should clear our pending fixture-inspection request?

They agreed to hold the request until its matching receipt. While reviewing the application, they found our monitor uses a shared read-and-clear helper. It can consume the receipt before the job handler reads it.

Does the monitor need to write anything to the handshake at all? Reading a diagnostic display should not secretly be a second job participant.

Name the intended sole consumer as well as the producer in the handover. A helper used from two places can preserve the same variable names while changing who actually handles the event.

Monitor needs observation only. Authors separated its snapshot from the job handler's receipt processing, and the handler now matches the held request before the agreed clearing sequence proceeds. Offline tests are being updated.

Test the monitor reading before and after the handler, with a delayed and repeated receipt. Those orders should give the same job outcome while the diagnostic view remains honest about what it has observed.

Those cases pass offline. The monitor cannot consume the receipt now. A late receipt stays with its timed-out attempt; it does not satisfy the next request. Restart with unresolved work still follows the agreed reconciliation response.

Has the covering tutor seen received while inspection is still unfinished? That is where a correct handshake can still get taught as the wrong promise.

Tutor understood the two stages from the revised screen. Integrator completed the installed interface checks with the monitor active, including the delayed and repeated cases. We closed the missed-receipt fault and issued the owner-and-clearing description with that version.

Keep the monitor-order test with the maintained package. It directly covers the shared helper that caused this, so it is more useful than a note telling future authors to be careful with acknowledgements.