Add negative/invalid-input test cases for MultiSigEscrowClient.initMultiSigOperation

[meshackyaro]

Description

MultiSigEscrowClient._validateInitParams (src/escrow/multisig.ts) implements seven distinct validation rules for initMultiSigOperation — missing escrowId, empty signers, threshold < 1, threshold > signers.length, missing unsignedXdr, missing networkPassphrase, a networkPassphrase mismatch against this.config.networkPassphrase, and duplicate signer addresses — each returning a distinct { ok: false, error } message. tests/multisig.test.ts exists, but it's worth confirming (and, per this audit, several of these specific negative branches — particularly the networkPassphrase mismatch and the duplicate-signers check — don't appear to have a dedicated assertion) that every one of these seven validation branches has its own explicit test case, since a regression in any single one would silently let an invalid multi-sig operation through.

Component

SDK

Difficulty

🟡 Medium

Tasks

• Cross-check tests/multisig.test.ts against all seven branches in _validateInitParams and add any missing negative test cases (especially the networkPassphrase mismatch and duplicate-signers checks)
• Add a test for threshold === signers.length (the boundary, valid case) and threshold > signers.length (invalid) to confirm the boundary is handled correctly
• Add a test confirming addSignature correctly rejects a signer not in params.signers with the exact "not an authorised signer" message

Acceptance Criteria

• Every branch in _validateInitParams has a corresponding explicit negative test case

Estimated Time

1-2 days

[Johnjnr1]

@Johnjnr1 has applied to work on this issue as part of the Stellar Wave Program's 8th wave.

i’m very conversant in solving problems like this, let me work on it

ℹ️ Repo Maintainers: To accept this application, review their application or assign @Johnjnr1 to this issue.

[aojomo]

@aojomo has applied to work on this issue as part of the Stellar Wave Program's 8th wave.

HI maintainer Please I would like to work on this issue

ℹ️ Repo Maintainers: To accept this application, review their application or assign @aojomo to this issue.

[Olayinka93]

@Olayinka93 has applied to work on this issue as part of the Stellar Wave Program's 8th wave.

Hello, this issue aligns well with my skills and experience. I’m confident I can resolve it effectively and deliver a proper solution. Kindly consider assigning it to me.

ℹ️ Repo Maintainers: To accept this application, review their application or assign @Olayinka93 to this issue.

[sadiqolalere41-pro]

@sadiqolalere41-pro has applied to work on this issue as part of the Stellar Wave Program's 8th wave.

Hi maintainer.
I'll resolve this issues an fix it correct.
Please assign me to this issue.

ℹ️ Repo Maintainers: To accept this application, review their application or assign @sadiqolalere41-pro to this issue.

[Johnsource-hub]

@Johnsource-hub has applied to work on this issue as part of the Stellar Wave Program's 8th wave.

I’d like to work on this issue. I understand the problem described and I’m confident I can investigate it, implement the necessary changes, and test the solution properly.

ℹ️ Repo Maintainers: To accept this application, review their application or assign @Johnsource-hub to this issue.

[damilare0813]

@damilare0813 has applied to work on this issue as part of the Stellar Wave Program's 8th wave.

Hi Maintainer, reviewed the issue in detail. Full stack background with solid experience relevant to this task. No blockers on my end — I'm ready to submit a PR shortly. Please assign.

ℹ️ Repo Maintainers: To accept this application, review their application or assign @damilare0813 to this issue.

[somotochukwu-dev]

@somotochukwu-dev has applied to work on this issue as part of the Stellar Wave Program's 8th wave.

Hi
Please assign this issue to me
Thanks

ℹ️ Repo Maintainers: To accept this application, review their application or assign @somotochukwu-dev to this issue.

[D-Bluemoon]

@D-Bluemoon has applied to work on this issue as part of the Stellar Wave Program's 8th wave.

Hey maintainer, I’d love to tackle this test coverage gap. When dealing with multi-sig operations, what the SDK rejects is just as critical as what it allows through, and leaving these negative validation branches exposed is a silent bug waiting to happen.

I want to systematically audit tests/multisig.test.ts against the seven rules in _validateInitParams and explicitly map a test to every single branch. I’ll make sure to heavily target the networkPassphrase mismatch and duplicate-signer edge cases since those are currently flying under the radar. I’ll also lock down the threshold boundary math (both the === valid case and the > invalid case) and ensure addSignature correctly boots out unauthorized signers with the exact expected error string. I'm all about rigorous, edge-case-driven testing and can get this sealed up so no invalid states slip through the cracks.

ℹ️ Repo Maintainers: To accept this application, review their application or assign @D-Bluemoon to this issue.

[drips-wave]

Congratulations, @D-Bluemoon! 🎉 Your application was accepted by the repo's maintainers, and the issue is due on August 31, 2026.

🧑‍💻 @D-Bluemoon: Please resolve the issue such that the repo's maintainers have enough time to review your contribution before the due date. You'll earn Points for completing the issue on-time, which will make you eligible for a share of the Stellar Wave Program's reward pool.

Warning

When opening a PR, please link it to this issue to ensure it gets tracked accurately. Points are awarded when this issue is marked as completed by the maintainer.

🤠 Repo maintainers: Please keep an eye on the contributor's progress and review their work before the due date. You can manage this issue, including adjusting its complexity and points, here.

🌊 Happy Wave 🌊