Tenant resolution priority

Question and use cases

Eight ordered steps resolve a TenantId; SingleTenant mode still writes the tenant key.

Use this chain when introducing a tenant hint or diagnosing tenant selection and mismatch failures.

Use the diagram during design review, incident diagnosis, code walkthroughs, and onboarding. It intentionally omits classes and projects unrelated to the focused question, so read it together with the source entry point and related topic pages.

This page covers only the named responsibilities and relationships; consult the relevant module documentation for capabilities not shown here.

Reading path

1. Step 1: Read the eight resolvers strictly by priority.
2. Step 2: Mark which sources are authenticated, operator-controlled, or caller-controlled.
3. Step 3: Stop at the first valid result, then check consistency rules for weaker hints.

Do not skip arrow direction, numbering, or group titles: they express dependency or time direction, execution order, and responsibility boundaries. If the diagram differs from current source or accepted architecture decisions, correct the generated catalog immediately.

Legend and notation

This is a RESPONSIBILITY CHAIN diagram. Use that form to understand the layout, then test your interpretation against the source facts below.

Key relationships and design meaning

Relationship 1

Source fact: The resolver evaluates eight steps in a fixed priority order and stops at the first valid tenant.

Architectural meaning: A fixed first-valid rule prevents later, weaker hints from silently changing a tenant selected by stronger context.

Review action: Can an untrusted hint override an authenticated tenant?

Relationship 2

Source fact: Header and path tenants must agree with the authenticated tenant context.

Architectural meaning: Consistency checks turn contradictory header or path hints into explicit failures instead of cross-tenant ambiguity.

Review action: How is a mismatch reported and audited?

Relationship 3

Source fact: Single-tenant mode still produces and persists a TenantId.

Architectural meaning: Persisting TenantId in single-tenant mode keeps the data model and migration path compatible with multi-tenant operation.

Review action: Does background execution establish an explicit tenant scope?

Design review questions

Answer each question when reviewing or implementing a related change. If code, tests, or an ADR cannot support the answer, do not decide from the diagram alone.

• Can an untrusted hint override an authenticated tenant?
• How is a mismatch reported and audited?
• Does background execution establish an explicit tenant scope?

How to use the answers

1. Identify the single owner of the capability or rule.
2. Confirm that dependency, call, or event direction does not reverse ownership.
3. Capture the conclusion with an automated test or repeatable command.

Boundaries and common mistakes

Boundary 1

System-job and root-operator override steps are reserved until their explicit session paths supply values.

• Do not infer: A connector in the diagram does not mean every implementation uses synchronous calls, a shared transaction, or shared data ownership.
• Review requirement: How is a mismatch reported and audited?

Boundary 2

A caller-controlled tenant hint never overrides a stronger authenticated source.

• Do not infer: A connector in the diagram does not mean every implementation uses synchronous calls, a shared transaction, or shared data ownership.
• Review requirement: Does background execution establish an explicit tenant scope?

Source verification and regeneration

The primary verification entry point is src/Framework/BitzOrcas.Application/Tenancy/ITenantResolver.cs. Inspect it and its direct references before regenerating diagram assets and pages.

# Regenerate bilingual SVG, standalone HTML, and documentation pages
npm run diagrams

# Check locale pairs, references, safety attributes, accessibility, and canvas bounds
npm run verify:diagrams

# Confirm that generation changed only the intended diagrams and pages
git diff -- scripts/diagrams diagram-sources public/diagrams src/content/docs

# Verify internal links, MDX structure, and professional depth gates
npm run verify:docs
npm run audit:docs-depth

Change-completion checklist

• Responsibilities, order, states, and relationships match current source.
• Every new element helps answer this page’s question instead of turning the diagram into an inventory.
• Arrows have explicit direction and semantics without implying nonexistent synchronous or transactional guarantees.
• Chinese and English titles, labels, facts, and boundaries remain semantically equivalent.
• The diagram remains readable on narrow screens, in fullscreen, and while zoomed, with no overlap or overflow.
• Relevant architecture tests, integration tests, or verification commands have run.
• If a long-lived constraint changed, its ADR or architecture documentation is updated.

Continue reading

• Architecture overview
• All architecture diagrams
• Platform modules