| 1 | # Use-Case Model AI Usage
|
|---|
| 2 |
|
|---|
| 3 | ## Name of AI service/solution that was used
|
|---|
| 4 |
|
|---|
| 5 | **Claude Code** (Anthropic)
|
|---|
| 6 |
|
|---|
| 7 | - **URL:** https://claude.com/claude-code
|
|---|
| 8 | - **Type of service/subscription:** Claude subscription, model Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context).
|
|---|
| 9 |
|
|---|
| 10 | ## Final result
|
|---|
| 11 |
|
|---|
| 12 | ### Results in details / description
|
|---|
| 13 |
|
|---|
| 14 | The AI:
|
|---|
| 15 |
|
|---|
| 16 | - Proposed the actor taxonomy (Visitor, Trader, Market Simulator) from the project description and the existing Go code.
|
|---|
| 17 | - Derived a set of 7 use cases covering the full trading loop (register, login, deposit, buy, sell, view portfolio, watchlist).
|
|---|
| 18 | - Wrote each `UseCaseXXXX.md` file with:
|
|---|
| 19 | - initiating actor, other actors, goals
|
|---|
| 20 | - step-by-step dialog-form scenario
|
|---|
| 21 | - **tested** SQL statements for every database-touching step, using the `project` schema
|
|---|
| 22 | - alternate flows for the most common failure cases (insufficient funds, insufficient holding, duplicate user, invalid input)
|
|---|
| 23 |
|
|---|
| 24 | ## Summary of AI involvement
|
|---|
| 25 |
|
|---|
| 26 | | | Session 1 — 2026-04-21 | Session 2 — 2026-08-06/07 |
|
|---|
| 27 | |---|---|---|
|
|---|
| 28 | | **What I brought** | The project description in `opis.md` and the existing Go backend | The use-case model as completed in session 1 |
|
|---|
| 29 | | **What the AI did** | Proposed the actor taxonomy and drafted seven use cases with tested SQL | Nothing — the model was not changed |
|
|---|
| 30 | | **What I decided** | To go solo, and therefore to document seven use cases rather than the three the rubric requires | To re-verify every scenario's SQL against a live database rather than trust the April run |
|
|---|
| 31 |
|
|---|
| 32 | This phase was finished in session 1. In session 2 the only work was
|
|---|
| 33 | verification: each scenario was executed against a live PostgreSQL 16 database,
|
|---|
| 34 | including the failure paths, and the results recorded on the
|
|---|
| 35 | `UseCaseXXXXImplementation` pages.
|
|---|
| 36 |
|
|---|
| 37 | ## Entire AI usage log
|
|---|
| 38 |
|
|---|
| 39 | See [ERModelAIUsage](../P1-ConceptualModel/ERModelAIUsage.md) for the full transcript — the same 2026-04-21 session produced the use-case documentation. The defining student prompt was:
|
|---|
| 40 |
|
|---|
| 41 | > I'm going solo do everything that you need to do, and tell me after what do I need to do
|
|---|
| 42 |
|
|---|
| 43 | which led the AI to pick "solo → 3 minimum per rubric → document 7 for a margin" as a default.
|
|---|
| 44 |
|
|---|
| 45 | > **Student action required:** append any future refinements of the use-case list or scenarios here.
|
|---|
| 46 |
|
|---|
| 47 |
|
|---|
| 48 | ### Session 2 — 2026-08-06 / 2026-08-07
|
|---|
| 49 |
|
|---|
| 50 | No changes were made to the use-case model in this session: the actor list, the
|
|---|
| 51 | seven use cases and the scenario SQL in `UseCase0001`–`UseCase0007` are as
|
|---|
| 52 | produced on 2026-04-21. The SQL in those scenarios was, however, re-verified by
|
|---|
| 53 | executing the corresponding prototype flows against a live PostgreSQL 16
|
|---|
| 54 | database, including the failure paths (insufficient funds, insufficient holding,
|
|---|
| 55 | duplicate registration, wrong password). The results are documented per use case
|
|---|
| 56 | on the `UseCaseXXXXImplementation` pages.
|
|---|
