Approve Expense — Proposed Guide

Planned API — Reference Only

Approve Expense: A proposed approval action would record a permitted reviewer decision against a specific expense version. It should validate policy…

Overview

A proposed approval action would record a permitted reviewer decision against a specific expense version. It should validate policy prerequisites and review conflicts.

Key concepts

Include the review identifier and version being approved. Associate the actor with the decision rather than trusting an actor id in the body.

Implementation considerations

A stale review or changed amount should require renewed consideration. This static operation initiates neither reimbursement nor accounting posting.

Proposed API behavior

POST /v1/expenses/{expense_id}/approve is an illustrative design for this topic. Path and field names may change before implementation. Access would require an authorized organization context and operation-specific permission; no public API or authorization grant is available here.

Proposed path parameters
Name	Type	Description
expense_idrequired	string	Stable fictional expense reference; not a secret and not evidence that a resource exists.

Illustrative request fields
Name	Type	Description
approval_id	string	Stable fictional approval reference; not a secret and not evidence that a resource exists.
version	integer	Illustrative resource revision for detecting stale updates; no live concurrency contract is published.
comment	string	Optional review text subject to future access and retention rules.

Static example requests

Proposed, non-executing request examples

# Proposed request text only; this reserved host is not a live API.
curl -X POST 'https://api.remizen.example/v1/expenses/exp_example_123/approve' \
  -H 'Authorization: Bearer YOUR_API_KEY' \
  -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
  --data '{
  "approval_id": "apr_example_123",
  "version": 1,
  "comment": "Fictional review comment"
}'

Fictional response example

200 (proposed example)Static response fixture

Fictional documentation data only. No request was sent, record created, review performed, payment initiated or provider connection activated.

JSON

{
  "data": {
    "expense_id": "exp_example_123",
    "approval_id": "apr_example_123",
    "version": 1,
    "comment": "Fictional review comment",
    "id": "exp_example_123",
    "organization_id": "org_example_123",
    "merchant": "Example Office Supply",
    "amount_minor": 12550,
    "currency": "USD",
    "status": "approved"
  },
  "meta": {
    "request_id": "req_example_123",
    "reference_only": true
  }
}

Illustrative error case

Review this failure case in context: A stale review or changed amount should require renewed consideration. This static operation initiates neither reimbursement nor accounting posting.

422 (illustrative; final error contracts are undecided)Proposed error fixture

Synthetic diagnostic example. Human-readable messages must not be used as stable programmatic contracts.

JSON

{
  "error": {
    "code": "validation_error",
    "message": "The proposed approve expense operation requires review of its input or authorization.",
    "request_id": "req_example_123"
  }
}

Proposed data types

Illustrative field dictionary
Name	Type	Description
expense_id	string	Stable fictional expense reference; not a secret and not evidence that a resource exists.
approval_id	string	Stable fictional approval reference; not a secret and not evidence that a resource exists.
version	integer	Illustrative resource revision for detecting stale updates; no live concurrency contract is published.
comment	string	Optional review text subject to future access and retention rules.

Multi-Level Approvals

Approval Workflows

Reject Expense