# Evidence Topic: 21–31 same-room-category multi-price warning

- Date: 2026-07-31
- Status: Active data-review finding; no code or database mutation
- Scope: Successful job `8aa1fdef3b644f3a9cc0f26924445a29`, July `21-month-end`
- Confidence: Fact
- Stale trigger: Finance-version change, report rerun, or pricing rule change

## Rule

For each output segment `(normalized Group Code, ARRIVAL, DEPARTURE)`, the processor groups Finance facts by
`(room_category_label, total_price)`. If one Finance room-category label has more than one distinct `total_price` in
that segment, it emits `COMPANY_REPORT_MULTI_PRICE_REVIEW` with stage `pricing` and keeps the report successful. It does
not use Booking Room or Markdown room types for this check, and it does not choose min/max/average on behalf of the user.

## Observed job

- Five companies succeeded; warnings were LianTai 4, QBD 8, DY-AI-Easy-KB 0, FengRun 1 and HanaTour 0.
- There were 13 warning groups covering 116 Finance record IDs.
- Representative LianTai case: Group Code `LT260718KB`, stay `2026-07-20 → 2026-07-22`; `RM3` appears at 3,600 for
  nine records and 6,800 for one record. The output therefore keeps both terms, e.g. `【RM3】3,600×9 + 【RM3】6,800×1`.
- The Booking lookup for that same Group Code remains independent (`【DBL】12` in the current Markdown source).

## Interpretation

The warning means Finance/Opera contains a price inconsistency or a legitimate pricing split for the same Finance room
category within one output segment. It is a human-review signal, not a Booking matching failure and not a report error.
To resolve it, inspect the underlying Finance/Opera pricing rows and decide whether the differing prices are expected. If
the source is wrong, correct the Finance input and rerun; if expected, retain the warning as an audit note.