IP Library Granted Patent US 12,282,418
Granted Patent B2
US 12,282,418 · App. 18/384,507 · Granted Apr 22, 2025

Systems and methods for software integration validation

Inventors: Steven Edouard (San Francisco, CA); Andrew Qin (San Francisco, CA); Erin Kavanaugh (San Francisco, CA); Karolis Kosas (San Francisco, CA)
Assignee: Stripe, Inc.
G06F11/3688G06F3/0482G06F9/547G06F11/3664G06F11/3692G06Q20/10G06Q20/34G06Q30/0185H04L63/08H04L67/306
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,282,418
App. No.
18/384,507
Granted
Apr 22, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

A method and apparatus for providing a document-integrated software integration validation by a service provider system are described. The method includes detecting an application program interface (API) call generated by a user system in a test transaction, the API call comprising a test identifier (ID) and a user system ID, the test ID identifying an API integration test scenario and the user system ID identifying the user system. The method also includes tracking a sequence of API calls and responses. Furthermore, the method includes receiving login credentials from the user system. The method also includes verifying the received login credentials with previously established login credentials associated with the user system ID. Additionally, the method includes determining whether the sequence of API calls and responses is performed correctly for the test transaction and serving the interactive integration guide to the user system indicating a result for the API integration test scenario.

Claims (42)

1. A method, comprising:

detecting, by a service provider system, an initial application program interface (API) call generated by a user system in a test transaction, the initial API call comprising a unique test identifier (ID) and a user system ID, the unique test ID identifying an API integration test scenario;

tracking, by the service provider system based at least in part on the user system ID, a sequence of API calls and responses including the initial API call, one or more subsequent API calls by the user system, one or more API responses from the service provider system, or a combination thereof;

and

in response to receiving, from the user system, a request for an interactive integration guide:

determining, by the service provider system, whether the sequence of API calls or the one or more API responses is performed correctly for one or more stages of the test transaction corresponding to the API integration test scenario, and

serving, by the service provider system, the interactive integration guide to the user system indicating a result for each of the one or more stages.

2. The method of claim 1 , wherein the unique test ID is a test payment card number.

3. The method of claim 1 , wherein the initial API call further comprises an integration guide ID identifying the interactive integration guide.

4. The method of claim 3 , wherein the integration guide ID comprises a unique metadata identifier rendered within an API call displayed in the interactive integration guide served to the user system.

5. The method of claim 3 , wherein the request for the interactive integration guide further comprises the integration guide ID.

6. The method of claim 1 , wherein the service provider system stores an expected sequence of one or more API calls and one or more expected API responses associated with each stage of the one or more stages, and the determining of whether the sequence of API calls and responses is performed correctly for each stage of the one or more stages of the test transaction comprises:

comparing the expected sequence of API calls and responses with the sequence of API calls and responses.

7. The method of claim 1 , wherein the one or more subsequent API calls by the user system and the one or more API responses from the service provider system are tracked in real time by the service provider system.

8. The method of claim 1 , wherein the service provider system comprises a commerce platform system that provides payment processing services to the user system via API based messaging provided by one or more commerce platform APIs.

9. The method of claim 1 , wherein the initial API call and the one or more subsequent API calls of the user system are generated by a software application being developed by the user system, software application integrating services of the service provider system using one or more APIs of the service provider system.

10. The method of claim 1 , wherein when the interactive integration guide served to the user system by the service provider system indicates an operation in the API integration test scenario that was not performed correctly, the interactive integration guide further comprises an error description, one or more pseudocode examples, one or more links to locations in an integration guide, or a combination thereof associated with the operation determined not to have been performed correctly.

11. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, including instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform operations, the operations comprising:

detecting, by a service provider system, an initial application program interface (API) call generated by a user system in a test transaction, the initial API call comprising a unique test identifier (ID) and a user system ID, the unique test ID identifying an API integration test scenario;

tracking, by the service provider system based at least in part on the user system ID, a sequence of API calls and responses including the initial API call, one or more subsequent API calls by the user system, one or more API responses from the service provider system, or a combination thereof;

and

in response to receiving, from the user system, a request for an interactive integration guide:

determining, by the service provider system, whether the sequence of API calls or the one or more API responses is performed correctly for one or more stages of the test transaction corresponding to the API integration test scenario, and

serving, by the service provider system, the interactive integration guide to the user system indicating a result for each of the one or more stages.

12. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11 , wherein the unique test ID is a test payment card number.

13. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11 , wherein the initial API call further comprises an integration guide ID identifying the interactive integration guide.

14. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 13 , wherein the request for the interactive integration guide further comprises the integration guide ID.

15. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11 , wherein the service provider system stores an expected sequence of one or more API calls and one or more expected API responses associated with each stage of the one or more stages, and the determining of whether the sequence of API calls and responses is performed correctly for each stage of the one or more stages of the test transaction comprises:

comparing the expected sequence of API calls and responses with the sequence of API calls and responses.

16. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11 , wherein the initial API call and the one or more subsequent API calls of the user system are generated by a software application being developed by the user system, software application integrating services of the service provider system using one or more APIs of the service provider system.

17. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11 , wherein when the interactive integration guide served to the user system by the service provider system indicates an operation in the API integration test scenario that was not performed correctly, the interactive integration guide further comprises an error description, one or more pseudocode examples, one or more links to locations in an integration guide, or a combination thereof associated with the operation determined not to have been performed correctly.

18. A system comprising:

a memory; and

a processor, coupled with the memory, configured to:

detect, by a service provider system, an initial application program interface (API) call generated by a user system in a test transaction, the initial API call comprising a unique test identifier (ID) and a user system ID, the unique test ID identifying an API integration test scenario;

track, by the service provider system based at least in part on the user system ID, a sequence of API calls and responses including the initial API call, one or more subsequent API calls by the user system, one or more API responses from the service provider system, or a combination thereof;

and

in response to receiving, from the user system, a request for an interactive integration guide:

determine, by the service provider system, whether the sequence of API calls or the one or more API responses is performed correctly for one or more stages of the test transaction corresponding to the API integration test scenario, and

serve, by the service provider system, the interactive integration guide to the user system indicating a result for each of the one or more stages.

19. The system of claim 18 , wherein the service provider system comprises a commerce platform system that provides payment processing services to the user system via API based messaging provided by one or more commerce platform APIs.

20. The system of claim 18 , wherein the initial API call and the one or more subsequent API calls of the user system are generated by a software application being developed by the user system, software application integrating services of the service provider system using one or more APIs of the service provider system.

Assignments (2)
CHANGE OF NAME Recorded Jan 30, 2026
From: STRIPE, INC.
To: STRIPE, LLC
Reel/Frame 074572/0338 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Oct 27, 2023
From: EDOUARD, STEVEN; QIN, ANDREW; KAVANAUGH, ERIN; KOSAS, KAROLIS
To: STRIPE, INC.
Reel/Frame 065371/0842 →
Continuity (3)
Continuation 17406794 · Aug 19, 2021
Continuation 16899037 · Jun 11, 2020
Related Publication 20240054068A1 · Feb 15, 2024
References Cited (10)
US 11327815B1 · Koponen · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20190149424A1 · O'Neill · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190180036A1 · Shukla · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20190188121A1 · Simon · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20210099483A1 · Shukla · 2021 [cited by applicant]
Adeel Ehsan et al.; RESTful API Testing Methodologies: Rationale, Challenges, and Solution Directions; mdpi; 16 pages; retrieved on Nov. 25, 2024 (Year: 2022). [cited by examiner]
Tobias Fertig et al.; Model-driven Testing of RESTful APIs; ACM; pp. 1497-1502; retrieved on Apr. 28, 2021. (Year: 2015). [cited by applicant]
Sergio Segura et al.; Metamorphic Testing of RESTful Web APIs; IEEE; pp. 1083-1099; retrieved on Apr. 28, 2021 (Year: 2018). [cited by applicant]
Isha et al.; Automated API Testing; ICICT; pp. 788-791; retrieved on May 23, 2023 (Year: 2018). [cited by applicant]
Andrea Arcuri; RESTful API Automated Test Case Generation; IEEE; pp. 9-20; retrieved on May 23, 2023. (Year: 2017). [cited by applicant]