Payment Note vs Tender Note?

Questions
1

Hi there!

Trying to understand something. This is on Production.

A client processes an order in Square POS (other tender) and attaches a note.

According to the client all locations are on the same version of POS , and they do payments consistently across all locations, meaning they enter the note in the same place during the checkout/payment flow.

When we retrieve payments via API the note comes in two different places. Some payments have a “note” key, some don’t have a “note” key and the note is in
external_details.source"

Can you please advise on why this might be happening? Thank you!

{
  "id": "5axj****",

  "created_at": "2024-10-21T18:47:42.036Z",
  "updated_at": "2024-10-21T18:47:46.469Z",
  
  "status": "COMPLETED",
  "source_type": "EXTERNAL",
  "location_id": "L5RM4BFVFYDMS",
  "order_id": "Rg4JY3g0TsMTlUMp75HANsRJcA9YY",

  "note": "customer note",  <---------- NOTE 

  "external_details": {
    "type": "OTHER",
    "source": "Other Payment Types" 
  },

  "application_details": {
    "square_product": "SQUARE_POS"
  }
}

{
  "id": "xUsdr****",

  "created_at": "2024-10-21T18:46:37.816Z",
  "updated_at": "2024-10-21T18:46:39.004Z",

  "status": "COMPLETED",
  "source_type": "EXTERNAL",
  "location_id": "68FKR0V8TQPWQ",
  "order_id": "muOXI8nhG8B4Jys9pkIGzHzeV",


  "external_details": {
    "type": "OTHER",
    "source": "customer note" <---------- NOTE
  },

  "application_details": {
    "square_product": "SQUARE_POS"
  }
}
2

I’m checking with the team. I haven’t been able to replicate this. The one difference I noticed was that on device is on iOS 16 and the other is on 17. :slightly_smiling_face:

3

Thank you Bryan.

The only difference I noticed is that the response with the “note” in root (first example) also has a key “capabilities”, which is not present in the other payment.

 "capabilities": [  
    "EDIT_AMOUNT_UP",
    "EDIT_AMOUNT_DOWN",
    "EDIT_TIP_AMOUNT_UP",
    "EDIT_TIP_AMOUNT_DOWN"
  ]

Otherwise, the payloads are pretty much identical

4

Wondering if this might be related to the user type logged into the POS?

Looking at the logs from the same device. The difference is the “team_member_id”.

This payment has “capabilities” and “note” in a separate key.

"order_id": "Rg4JY3g0TsMTlUMp75HANsRJcA9YY",
"location_id": "L5RM4BFVFYDMS",
....
"note": "customer note",
"capabilities": [
    "EDIT_AMOUNT_UP",
    "EDIT_AMOUNT_DOWN",
    "EDIT_TIP_AMOUNT_UP",
    "EDIT_TIP_AMOUNT_DOWN"
],
"external_details": {
    "type": "OTHER",
    "source": "Other Payment Types"
},
"receipt_number": "5axj",
"device_details": {
    "device_id": "DEVICE_INSTALLATION_ID:E8ED4C25-0A3F-42B6-98D6-3E6B55C9819A",
    "device_name": "GCJVFNMCHLF9",
    "device_installation_id": "E8ED4C25-0A3F-42B6-98D6-3E6B55C9819A"
},
"team_member_id": "88M77M7CPNBAT",

This payment (from today) has no “note”, no “capabilities”, user note is in “external_details->source”.

"order_id": "4bQvWjuydjEQTwT9JrFAXBmeV",
"location_id": "L5RM4BFVFYDMS",
...
"external_details": {
    "type": "OTHER",
    "source": "customer note" 
},

"receipt_number": "5CDC",
"device_details": {
    "device_id": "DEVICE_INSTALLATION_ID:E8ED4C25-0A3F-42B6-98D6-3E6B55C9819A",
    "device_name": "GCJVFNMCHLF9",
    "device_installation_id": "E8ED4C25-0A3F-42B6-98D6-3E6B55C9819A"
},
"team_member_id": "TMGaiu9PQQbAs3hx",