SAP business-partner library — first-run working review
WORKING NOTES — review decisions belong in your controlled records.
Guide: https://seal.run/integrations/sap

Use this with the SAP business-partner library first-run procedure. Retain the actual configuration and evidence, then record what happened in each receiving exercise. Expected behavior is printed as a prompt; your observed result starts blank.

1. Installed configuration and source route
Record the Public Edition test tenant, API URL, SAP_COM_0008 arrangement, dedicated communication-user identity and successful Seal connection test. Retain the copied-field preview and selected library groups; exclude credentials from the notes.
Your evidence and observations:
[Not recorded]

2. Identity and expected population
List selected partner keys and their source environment, optional captures and the reference used by the supplier assessment. Record the actual Seal content-based versions and what changed between captures; do not label them SAP revision numbers.
Your evidence and observations:
[Not recorded]

3. Access and assessed identity
Record effective group membership and observed access for the intended reviewer and an unrelated user. Compare the identity used by the assessment with the later capture. Explain the supplier owner’s review separately from business-partner selection.
Your evidence and observations:
[Not recorded]

4. Exercise 1: Two partners share a name
Input: Use two test partner keys with the same display name, selecting only the intended key.
Expected: The review resolves the selected partner by environment and key. It neither merges both partners nor grants selection to the other key because its name matches.
Record the actual input/evidence references, observed result, whether it matches the expectation and any unresolved issue.
Your evidence and observations:
[Not recorded]

5. Exercise 2: A user belongs to another permitted group
Input: Check a test user who is absent from the selected group but has a second membership that grants the same access.
Expected: Explain the effective membership before declaring the access control broken. Repeat with a genuinely unrelated user and record both results.
Record the actual input/evidence references, observed result, whether it matches the expectation and any unresolved issue.
Your evidence and observations:
[Not recorded]

6. Exercise 3: The copied identity changes after assessment
Input: Run the two-capture example and inspect the existing SUP-045 evidence.
Expected: The assessed identity and later observation remain distinguishable. Supplier qualification is reconsidered only through its review, not automatically granted by the latest name.
Record the actual input/evidence references, observed result, whether it matches the expectation and any unresolved issue.
Your evidence and observations:
[Not recorded]

7. Exercise 4: A manufacturing team asks for stock movements
Input: Try to specify a consumption-reconciliation report from the selected partner library alone.
Expected: The missing transaction evidence is explicit. The handover scopes a separate manufacturing operation and recovery contract instead of implying that SAP_COM_0008 setup has enabled it.
Record the actual input/evidence references, observed result, whether it matches the expectation and any unresolved issue.
Your evidence and observations:
[Not recorded]

8. Implementation review and next work
Identify the configuration/mapping revision tested, reviewer, open issues and owner for each next action. Cite the retained source and destination evidence. A filled note is not itself an accepted test; record the review decision through your actual process.
Your evidence and observations:
[Not recorded]

EVIDENCE NEEDED TO FINISH
The selected partners and effective access agree with the intended library scope, copied fields match the preview, and the earlier assessment’s identity remains identifiable. Any name-change assessment is assigned to the supplier owner. BOMs and movements are separately scoped work.