# Decisions

These are the decisions your developer will need from you before or during the build. Nothing below is settled.

## D-001 — When does payment happen — at booking, on walker acceptance, or after the walk?

- **Proposed:** Charged when the walker accepts
- **Alternative:** Charge the owner's card at the time of booking request, before walker acceptance
- **Why it matters:** Determines refund exposure and race-condition handling if a walker declines after a charge is placed.
- **Affects:** TB-009, TB-017, TB-020
- **Needed before:** before build starts

## D-002 — Do walkers need identity or background checks before going live?

- **Proposed:** Manual admin approval only
- **Alternative:** Third-party background check via a vendor like Checkr before approval
- **Why it matters:** Affects trust and safety, approval queue complexity, and legal liability for a service involving pets and home access.
- **Affects:** TB-002, TB-025
- **Needed before:** before launch scope

## D-003 — Launch gap: refunds and disputed charges must be handled manually by an admin rather than through an automated flow

- **Proposed:** Ship without TB-019 at launch.
- **Alternative:** Pull TB-019 into launch scope now.
- **Why it matters:** At launch, refunds and disputed charges must be handled manually by an admin rather than through an automated flow.
- **Affects:** TB-017, TB-018, TB-020, TB-019
- **Needed before:** before launch scope

## D-004 — Launch gap: owners and walkers cannot reschedule or cancel a booking within policy windows without contacting support directly

- **Proposed:** Ship without TB-010 at launch.
- **Alternative:** Pull TB-010 into launch scope now.
- **Why it matters:** At launch, owners and walkers cannot reschedule or cancel a booking within policy windows without contacting support directly.
- **Affects:** TB-009, TB-011, TB-010
- **Needed before:** before launch scope

## D-005 — Launch gap: owners and walkers cannot chat in real time and only receive automated booking and message notifications

- **Proposed:** Ship without TB-021, TB-023 at launch.
- **Alternative:** Pull TB-021, TB-023 into launch scope now.
- **Why it matters:** At launch, owners and walkers cannot chat in real time and only receive automated booking and message notifications.
- **Affects:** TB-022, TB-021, TB-023
- **Needed before:** before launch scope

## D-006 — Launch gap: search cannot filter by ZIP code radius or distance, only by availability, price, and dog size

- **Proposed:** Ship without TB-005 at launch.
- **Alternative:** Pull TB-005 into launch scope now.
- **Why it matters:** At launch, search cannot filter by ZIP code radius or distance, only by availability, price, and dog size.
- **Affects:** TB-006, TB-007, TB-008, TB-005
- **Needed before:** before launch scope

## D-007 — Launch gap: admins cannot suspend accounts or resolve disputes through a dashboard, only manage the walker approval queue and audit log

- **Proposed:** Ship without TB-024, TB-026 at launch.
- **Alternative:** Pull TB-024, TB-026 into launch scope now.
- **Why it matters:** At launch, admins cannot suspend accounts or resolve disputes through a dashboard, only manage the walker approval queue and audit log.
- **Affects:** TB-025, TB-027, TB-024, TB-026
- **Needed before:** before launch scope

## D-008 — Which payment processor for card checkout and walker payouts?

- **Proposed:** Stripe
- **Alternative:** Braintree with a separate payout provider
- **Why it matters:** Switching processors after integration is costly; Stripe Connect bundles checkout and payouts in one system.
- **Affects:** TB-017, TB-018, TB-020
- **Needed before:** before build starts

## D-009 — What take rate or commission does the platform charge on bookings?

- **Proposed:** 15% commission deducted from walker payout
- **Alternative:** Flat per-booking service fee charged to the owner instead
- **Why it matters:** Changes checkout math, receipts, and payout calculations across every money-related ticket.
- **Affects:** TB-017, TB-018, TB-020
- **Needed before:** before launch scope

## D-010 — What geocoding and maps provider powers ZIP code radius search?

- **Proposed:** Google Maps Platform
- **Alternative:** Mapbox Geocoding API
- **Why it matters:** Cost and accuracy differ; Mapbox is cheaper at scale, Google has denser US ZIP code coverage.
- **Affects:** TB-005
- **Needed before:** before later scope

## D-011 — What cancellation and refund policy windows apply?

- **Proposed:** Full refund if cancelled 24+ hours before the walk, no refund inside 24 hours
- **Alternative:** Tiered partial refunds scaling with notice given
- **Why it matters:** Directly shapes the refund and payout-adjustment logic, which is high-risk money code.
- **Affects:** TB-010, TB-019
- **Needed before:** before later scope

## D-012 — What formula weights recency and volume in the walker rating score?

- **Proposed:** Bayesian average weighting recent reviews higher over a 90-day window
- **Alternative:** Simple rolling average of the last 20 reviews only
- **Why it matters:** Affects search ranking fairness and how quickly new walkers can build trust.
- **Affects:** TB-016
- **Needed before:** before launch scope

## D-013 — Do push notifications require a native app or is web push sufficient at launch?

- **Proposed:** Web push only at launch, native app deferred
- **Alternative:** Ship React Native app alongside web for reliable mobile push
- **Why it matters:** Changes stack choice and notification delivery reliability for time-sensitive booking alerts.
- **Affects:** TB-022
- **Needed before:** before build starts

## D-014 — What documents are required in the walker approval queue?

- **Proposed:** Government-issued ID photo and self-attested insurance statement
- **Alternative:** Require proof of pet-care certification or insurance policy documents
- **Why it matters:** Determines admin review workload and what document storage/validation the approval queue must support.
- **Affects:** TB-025
- **Needed before:** before launch scope

## D-015 — How are flagged reviews and messages triaged before a full moderation team exists?

- **Proposed:** Single admin queue reviewed manually within 24 hours
- **Alternative:** Auto-hide flagged content immediately pending review
- **Why it matters:** Affects user trust and admin workload once moderation ships in later scope.
- **Affects:** TB-015, TB-026
- **Needed before:** before later scope