Free learning / 80-minute team practice

Receive a scoped data export

An eighty-minute team session: receive a changed tenant and revoked access through actual SQL, retain individual evidence and assign the remaining API, security and data decisions.

Begin reading Download a working copy

No account needed. Use your own copy for writing and keep the original as a reference.

Use this prepared eighty-minute session for an employee team or FDE pair preparing to receive a client's data integration. Preview the team agenda before choosing whether to replace your current local plan. Previewing changes no agenda; applying the starter creates no assignment or attendance record. Setup, reading and breaks are outside the planned timebox. Carry unfinished work forward.

Download the complete offline workshop folder for the program, local reading, agenda and blank individual notes in one ZIP. Install the approved runtime separately; the interactive web diagram and planner are not included. Individual downloads below remain available.

Prepare the people and local files

Prepare Python 3.11+ through your organization's approved route. Each participant downloads the continuation program into a separate working folder and keeps their own blank receiving record. The program needs only the standard library; it does not consume the worksheet. No model, account or network is needed after preparation. Each command resets its own fictional SQLite database; participants do not share a live grant or tenant.

Read the scope and current-authority explanation before the session, and record that exposure. These published cases are practice, not an unseen test. Use invented aliases and retain first predictions, commands, actual outputs, assistance and later corrections. A copied report is shared evidence, not the recipient's execution. If someone can only observe, record that mode and leave their own execution unrun.

Assign A and B to the first builder/receiver round and swap them later. Assign a facilitator or pod lead to keep time and unresolved questions. A pair can combine that role, recording the overlap. API, security and data responsibilities below are roles to assign to real people later, not a claim that a staffed team exists.

Before facilitating, independently run the comparisons and locate the SQL, parameters, current grant and whether a second-page SELECT ran. Be able to explain why plausible IDs or a successful command cannot settle a receiving decision. Request a technical co-facilitator if that explanation still needs support; retain the support used rather than treating this preparation as a trainer credential.

Illustrative learning artifact

One event. Two transaction boundaries.

Source transactionCase update + outbox eventCommit both or neither

event-42 → delivery may repeat →

Receiver transactionEvent identity + taskDuplicate delivery → existing result

Minutes 0–15: retain an individual starting account

The original request is east/open. East and west deliberately reuse numeric IDs, and the fictional caller initially has both grants. Before comparing accounts, each person predicts the unchanged second page, the changed-tenant result and the effect of revoking east's grant. Then each runs their own baseline:

Code example

python3 fde-pagination-scope.py same-query --page-size 2 > my-baseline.json

Retain the original population and next window separately from the observed rows. At size two, east/10 and east/20 precede east/30 and east/40. Record the actual result and what you had already read. A matching local baseline establishes neither a complete production export nor an authenticated real caller.

Minutes 15–35: receive a tenant change

A hands over the exact program copy, baseline command and report. B predicts and runs the two tenant conditions without A taking over:

Code example

python3 fde-pagination-scope.py tenant-unbound --page-size 2 > receiving-tenant.json
python3 fde-pagination-scope.py tenant-bound --page-size 2 > receiving-bound.json

B locates saved_continuation, second_request, current_grant_observation, combined_scoped_keys and second_page_query. Numeric IDs 10, 20, 30, 40 can hide east/10, east/20, west/30, west/40. Both tenant grants are current, so permission to read west does not establish a valid continuation of east. In the bound case, the changed scope is refused and the second query is null. That differs from an executed query returning an empty page. Keep B's first explanation before feedback.

Minutes 35–60: swap who receives revoked access

B now hands over; A receives and writes a prediction before executing:

Code example

python3 fde-pagination-scope.py authority-cached --page-size 2 > receiving-cached.json
python3 fde-pagination-scope.py authority-current --page-size 2 > receiving-current.json

A locates the committed grant update, authority_used_for_decision and released_without_current_grant_keys. The cached case releases east/30 and east/40 even though the current grant observation is false. The current-read case withholds them. Preserve first-page rows in the account: they were delivered before revocation. Do not relabel that earlier delivery as the later release.

If time allows, A predicts and runs one changed page boundary, preserving the earlier reports. Otherwise record this step as unrun:

Code example

python3 fde-pagination-scope.py tenant-unbound --page-size 1 > changed-tenant.json

The original next window is now east/20, while the received next row is west/20. Compare tenant-qualified identities rather than rewriting the first prediction or reference. The changed page size applies to both requests in this fresh run. No mid-traversal resizing, token expiry or concurrent revocation race is tested.

Minutes 60–80: agree who receives the remaining work

Each person defends one observation from their own record. The facilitator keeps disagreement, assistance and missing work visible. Completed lab observations exit 0 even for unsafe cases and deliberate refusals; record the actual decision and query, rather than using exit 0 as a learner result. An interpreter failure or missing report is a different observation.

Accountable role	Receiving responsibility and next evidence
API owner	Define query binding, refusal responses, expiry, retry, cancellation and the completion signal. Supply an actual consumer contract test.
Security owner	Verify the trusted caller and current permission, including the check-to-release race absent from this sequential fixture.
Data owner	Define the approved population and handling of data delivered before a grant changes.
Receiving engineer	Exercise the real consumer's scope and error handling; do not turn refused access into “export complete.”
Pod lead	Assign each unresolved decision to an actual owner, bounded next test and agreed review point.

Add these fields to each person's receiving record:

Text example

Actual role / prior reading or revealed examples:
Prediction before running / exact command / report reference:
My tenant-qualified observation / current grant / read or refusal:
My first explanation / later correction and reason:
Action I personally executed / observed only / help or takeover:
Unrun step / unresolved owner question / next test and review point:

An agreed group explanation does not replace the two individual accounts. Keep solo or combined roles explicit. Continue in the full pagination guide or the related protected Academy lesson for further study. This practice confers no production permission, independence, qualification or client placement.