Initial import: eCW Charge Validation bot and results Portal

Snapshot of the working project as of 2026-10-23 (local 2d4d4fc), one
commit with no earlier history: the tracked files were de-identified
first (synthetic claim ids and patient data only; see Context.md
section 7). Credentials, run logs, screenshots, claim reports and client
workbooks are gitignored and not included.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

tests/test_conditions_medicare_telehealth.py

@@ -0,0 +1,601 @@
+r"""
+conditions/medicare_telehealth.py — document condition #22: POS=2/M1=93-or-95
+(per audio/video mode) on the claim's primary CPT row, PLUS adding G2025 with
+the same modifier and zeroing/unchecking every other CPT row once G2025 is
+confirmed on the claim.
+
+    python tests\test_conditions_medicare_telehealth.py
+
+Two fixtures, deliberately: ub_claim.html for the base detect/POS/M1 shape
+(same as test_conditions_telehealth.py), and hcfa_claim.html for the full
+G2025 flow — the Add-button-plus-Fee-Schedule-picker interaction is only
+verified evidence on the "Claim"/HCFA and Dental screens (see
+hcfa_claim.html's own comment), not the UB form. On ub_claim.html, the
+condition correctly reports "could not confirm G2025" and skips the
+cleanup step rather than guessing at a flow with no evidence behind it
+there — that honest degradation is itself part of what these tests prove.
+
+Two other things this file exists to prove, beyond the basic
+detect/apply/describe shape:
+
+  * **this condition and the general telehealth condition never both fire
+    on the same claim** — Medicare is excluded from telehealth.py's own
+    modifier map specifically so this doesn't happen (see
+    test_conditions_telehealth.py's `video_modifier_is_none_for_medicare_too`);
+  * **G2025 gets the SAME audio/video modifier as the primary row**, not a
+    hardcoded 95 — the document's own wording ("add G2025 with 95 modifier")
+    is the video case; an audio-only Medicare visit needs 93 on both rows,
+    the same reasoning `telehealth_mode()` already applies elsewhere.
+"""
+
+import sys
+import pathlib
+import inspect
+
+ROOT = pathlib.Path(__file__).resolve().parent.parent
+sys.path.insert(0, str(ROOT / "src"))
+
+FIXTURE = pathlib.Path(__file__).resolve().parent / "fixtures" / "ub_claim.html"
+HCFA_FIXTURE = pathlib.Path(__file__).resolve().parent / "fixtures" / "hcfa_claim.html"
+
+from ecw_bot.conditions import medicare_telehealth      # noqa: E402
+from ecw_bot.conditions.base import ConditionResult, run_all  # noqa: E402
+from ecw_bot.selectors import claim_form as sel          # noqa: E402
+from ecw_bot.pages import claim_form                      # noqa: E402
+
+
+CASES = []
+
+
+def case(fn):
+    CASES.append(fn)
+    return fn
+
+
+_MEDICARE_DATA = {
+    "progress_notes": {"text": "Session Setting (PoS): TeleHealth"},
+    "insurance": [{"Name": "Humana Medicare"}],
+}
+
+
+@case
+def detect_true_for_telehealth_plus_medicare():
+    assert medicare_telehealth.detect("C1", _MEDICARE_DATA) is True
+
+
+@case
+def detect_false_when_the_note_does_not_mention_telehealth():
+    data = {
+        "progress_notes": {"text": "Regular in-office visit."},
+        "insurance": [{"Name": "Humana Medicare"}],
+    }
+    assert medicare_telehealth.detect("C1", data) is False
+
+
+@case
+def detect_false_for_a_non_medicare_payer():
+    data = {
+        "progress_notes": {"text": "Session Setting (PoS): TeleHealth"},
+        "insurance": [{"Name": "BH COLORADO ACCESS"}],  # Medicaid
+    }
+    assert medicare_telehealth.detect("C1", data) is False
+
+
+@case
+def detect_false_with_no_insurance_row_at_all():
+    data = {"progress_notes": {"text": "Session Setting (PoS): TeleHealth"}}
+    assert medicare_telehealth.detect("C1", data) is False
+
+
+@case
+def apply_sets_pos_2_and_mod1_95_on_the_first_row_only(page):
+    """
+    ub_claim.html has no Add-flow evidence (see this file's module
+    docstring), so G2025 must come back "could not confirm" here — the
+    POS/M1 change on the primary row must still land regardless, and the
+    honest failure to confirm G2025 must mean the cleanup step is SKIPPED
+    entirely, not applied against a claim with nothing else billable.
+    """
+    page.goto(FIXTURE.as_uri())
+    result = medicare_telehealth.apply(page, "9120000", _MEDICARE_DATA)
+    assert isinstance(result, ConditionResult)
+    assert result.condition_name == "medicare_telehealth"
+    assert result.changed is True
+
+    primary = result.changes[0]
+    assert primary["code"] == "H0023", result.changes
+    assert primary["after"]["pos"] == "2", result.changes
+    assert primary["after"]["mod1"] == "95", result.changes
+
+    assert [c for c in result.changes if c.get("added")] == [], result.changes
+    assert [c for c in result.changes if "fee" in c] == [], result.changes
+
+
+@case
+def apply_uses_93_for_an_audio_only_medicare_visit(page):
+    """
+    Real live example (a progress note reading "THV Audio Only: Telehealth
+    audio phone call only. No video."): Medicare telehealth is NOT always
+    modifier 95 — an audio-only visit still needs 93 on the primary row,
+    the same as any other payer's audio-only visit.
+    """
+    page.goto(FIXTURE.as_uri())
+    data = {
+        "progress_notes": {"text": "THV Audio Only: Telehealth audio "
+                                    "phone call only. No video."},
+        "insurance": [{"Name": "Humana Medicare"}],
+    }
+    result = medicare_telehealth.apply(page, "9120000", data)
+    assert result.changed is True
+    assert result.changes[0]["after"]["mod1"] == "93", result.changes
+
+
+@case
+def apply_adds_g2025_via_the_real_fee_schedule_picker_on_the_hcfa_screen(page):
+    """
+    The full real flow, on the screen where it is actually verified (see
+    hcfa_claim.html's own comment: claim 9109000's live evidence): click
+    Add, search the Fee Schedule picker for G2025, select the one exact
+    match, click its OK — never typing straight into the grid's trailing
+    "*" row. "Other Primary CPT codes" then means every code but G2025,
+    INCLUDING 99213 (which just got POS=2/M1=95) and G8510 (already
+    excluded, but its fee is not yet zero) — per the document's own
+    wording, not a guess.
+    """
+    page.goto(HCFA_FIXTURE.as_uri())
+    result = medicare_telehealth.apply(page, "9103000", _MEDICARE_DATA)
+    assert result.changed is True
+
+    primary = result.changes[0]
+    assert primary["code"] == "99213", result.changes
+
+    added = [c for c in result.changes if c.get("added")]
+    assert len(added) == 1, result.changes
+    assert added[0]["code"] == "G2025" and added[0]["modifier"] == "95", added
+
+    zeroed = {c["code"] for c in result.changes if "fee" in c}
+    assert zeroed == {"99213", "J7298", "G8510"}, result.changes
+
+    g2025_row = page.locator(sel.SEL_CPT_ROWS).last
+    assert g2025_row.locator(sel.SEL_CPT_CODE).first.input_value() == "G2025"
+    assert g2025_row.locator(sel.SEL_CPT_MOD1).first.input_value() == "95"
+
+
+@case
+def apply_leaves_g2025_alone_and_still_cleans_up_when_it_is_already_present(page):
+    """
+    G2025 already on the claim (a prior run, or an operator added it by
+    hand): add_cpt_row() must never be attempted a second time, but the
+    unchecked/zero-fee cleanup on every OTHER row still has to run. G2025
+    is seeded directly here (not via add_cpt_row) - this case is about
+    what apply() does once G2025 already exists, not about the add
+    mechanism itself.
+    """
+    page.goto(HCFA_FIXTURE.as_uri())
+    page.evaluate(
+        """(code) => {
+            const tbody = document.querySelector(
+                '#claimCPTCodesTable8888888888888 tbody');
+            const addRowTr = tbody.querySelector('tr:last-child');
+            const tr = document.createElement('tr');
+            tr.id = 'CPTROW_3';
+            tr.innerHTML =
+                '<td><input data-fieldname="claimCPTCode" value="' + code + '" readonly></td>'
+              + '<td><input data-fieldname="ClaimCPTMOD1" value="95"></td>'
+              + '<td><input data-fieldname="ClaimCPTBilledFee" value="25.00"></td>';
+            tbody.insertBefore(tr, addRowTr);
+        }""", "G2025")
+
+    result = medicare_telehealth.apply(page, "9103000", _MEDICARE_DATA)
+    added = [c for c in result.changes if c.get("added")]
+    assert added == [], result.changes  # never re-added
+
+    zeroed = {c["code"] for c in result.changes if "fee" in c}
+    assert zeroed == {"99213", "J7298", "G8510"}, result.changes
+    g2025_row = page.locator(sel.SEL_CPT_ROWS).last
+    assert g2025_row.locator(sel.SEL_CPT_MOD1).first.input_value() == "95", \
+        "the pre-existing G2025 row's own modifier must be left untouched"
+
+
+@case
+def describe_names_the_row_and_the_modifier(page):
+    page.goto(HCFA_FIXTURE.as_uri())
+    result = medicare_telehealth.apply(page, "9103000", _MEDICARE_DATA)
+    text = medicare_telehealth.describe(result)
+    assert "99213" in text, text
+    assert "95" in text, text
+    assert "G2025" in text, text
+    # _MEDICARE_DATA's note text is "Session Setting (PoS): TeleHealth" —
+    # the "telehealth" signal — so the operator can see WHY this fired.
+    assert "telehealth" in text, text
+
+
+@case
+def run_all_fires_only_medicare_telehealth_not_the_general_condition(page):
+    """
+    Against the REAL registry (conditions.CONDITIONS), not fakes — proves
+    telehealth.py and medicare_telehealth.py do not both write to the same
+    Medicare claim's primary row. If they did, the second condition's fill()
+    would overwrite the first's, and the confirmation dialog would show the
+    same row twice.
+    """
+    page.goto(FIXTURE.as_uri())
+    results = run_all(page, "9120000", _MEDICARE_DATA)
+    assert len(results) == 1, results
+    assert results[0].condition_name == "medicare_telehealth", results
+
+
+@case
+def run_all_still_fires_only_medicare_on_an_audio_only_medicare_claim(page):
+    """
+    The exact scenario that would have double-fired before telehealth.py's
+    _choose_modifier checked payer group before the audio/video split: an
+    audio-only Medicare visit. Both conditions' detect() would return True
+    for this claim, so this proves only one of them actually writes.
+    """
+    page.goto(FIXTURE.as_uri())
+    data = {
+        "progress_notes": {"text": "THV Audio Only: Telehealth audio "
+                                    "phone call only. No video."},
+        "insurance": [{"Name": "Humana Medicare"}],
+    }
+    results = run_all(page, "9120000", data)
+    assert len(results) == 1, results
+    assert results[0].condition_name == "medicare_telehealth", results
+    assert results[0].changes[0]["after"]["mod1"] == "93", results
+
+
+@case
+def a_g2025_that_cannot_be_added_is_reported_failed_and_sent_to_review(page):
+    """
+    Review item D6: on ub_claim.html the Add flow has no evidence, so
+    G2025 cannot be confirmed. The primary row DID change (POS 11 -> 2),
+    so the result is still changed=True — the operator must see it — but
+    it carries a G2025 failed record, a review reason (which keeps Save
+    away), a plain describe() line, and a summary comment that says so
+    instead of the fixed "G2025 added … other CPTs unchecked".
+    """
+    page.goto(FIXTURE.as_uri())
+    result = medicare_telehealth.apply(page, "9120000", _MEDICARE_DATA)
+    assert result.changed is True, result
+    assert result.review == medicare_telehealth.G2025_NOT_ADDED == (
+        "G2025 NOT added — add it by hand; the other CPT rows were NOT "
+        "unchecked"), result.review
+    failed = [c for c in result.changes if c.get("failed")]
+    assert len(failed) == 1 and failed[0]["code"] == "G2025" \
+        and failed[0]["row"] is None and failed[0]["modifier"] == "95", \
+        result.changes
+
+    text = medicare_telehealth.describe(result)
+    assert "  G2025 NOT added — add it by hand; other rows NOT unchecked" \
+        in text, text
+    assert medicare_telehealth.summary_comment(result) == (
+        "Medicare Telehealth (POS 02 / modifier 95 on H0023; G2025 NOT "
+        "added — add by hand)")
+
+    # Through the runner: the review reaches the report (what the save
+    # gate and the Charge Summary read), the comment replaces the fixed one.
+    page.goto(FIXTURE.as_uri())
+    report = {}
+    run_all(page, "9120000", _MEDICARE_DATA,
+            conditions=[medicare_telehealth], report=report)
+    assert report["review"] == [{"name": "medicare_telehealth",
+                                 "reason": medicare_telehealth.G2025_NOT_ADDED}
+                                ], report
+    assert "G2025 NOT added" in report["comments"]["medicare_telehealth"]
+
+
+@case
+def a_failed_g2025_with_nothing_else_changed_is_declined(page):
+    """Primary row already right (POS 02 / 95) and G2025 cannot be added:
+    nothing changed, but the claim still lacks G2025 — declined, not
+    none(), so it is a Review row rather than Pass."""
+    page.goto(FIXTURE.as_uri())
+    row0 = page.locator(sel.SEL_CPT_ROWS).nth(0)
+    row0.locator(sel.SEL_CPT_POS).first.fill("02")
+    row0.locator(sel.SEL_CPT_MOD1).first.fill("95")
+    result = medicare_telehealth.apply(page, "9120000", _MEDICARE_DATA)
+    assert result == ConditionResult.declined(
+        "medicare_telehealth", medicare_telehealth.G2025_NOT_ADDED), result
+
+
+@case
+def a_g2025_modifier_that_does_not_take_is_sent_to_review(page):
+    """
+    The add worked but M1 on the new G2025 row did not take (read back
+    after `_set_row_modifier`, review item D6). Simulated by making the
+    modifier write a no-op: the G2025 row reads back with a blank M1.
+    """
+    page.goto(HCFA_FIXTURE.as_uri())
+    original = claim_form._set_row_modifier
+    claim_form._set_row_modifier = lambda page, code, modifier: True
+    try:
+        result = medicare_telehealth.apply(page, "9103000", _MEDICARE_DATA)
+    finally:
+        claim_form._set_row_modifier = original
+    assert result.changed is True, result
+    assert result.review == ("G2025 added but its modifier did not take — "
+                             "check M1"), result.review
+    assert [c for c in result.changes if c.get("added")], result.changes
+
+
+@case
+def g2025_modifier_ok_is_true_when_the_modifier_took(page):
+    page.goto(HCFA_FIXTURE.as_uri())
+    g = claim_form.apply_medicare_telehealth_g2025(page, "95")
+    assert g["g2025_added"] is True and g["g2025_modifier_ok"] is True, g
+
+
+@case
+def apply_twice_on_the_hcfa_screen_is_none_the_second_time(page):
+    """
+    Review item D3: once G2025 is present, the primary row is POS 2 / 95
+    and every other row is already unchecked at 0.00, the claim follows
+    rule #22 — the second apply is none(), not a change and not a review.
+    """
+    page.goto(HCFA_FIXTURE.as_uri())
+    first = medicare_telehealth.apply(page, "9103000", _MEDICARE_DATA)
+    assert first.changed is True and first.review == "", first
+    # Unchecked rows and fee-only rows are counted apart (final review,
+    # 2026-10-05; this used to expect "3 other CPT(s) unchecked/fee
+    # zeroed", which suggested an uncheck on the row that only had its fee
+    # zeroed).
+    assert medicare_telehealth.summary_comment(first) == (
+        "Medicare Telehealth (POS 02 / modifier 95 on 99213; G2025 added; "
+        "2 other CPT(s) unchecked; 1 other CPT fee(s) zeroed)"), \
+        medicare_telehealth.summary_comment(first)
+    second = medicare_telehealth.apply(page, "9103000", _MEDICARE_DATA)
+    assert second == ConditionResult.none("medicare_telehealth"), second
+
+
+@case
+def an_already_correct_primary_row_still_runs_the_g2025_step(page):
+    """The primary row is already POS 02 / 95: it is not a change, but
+    G2025 is still added and the other rows still zeroed."""
+    page.goto(HCFA_FIXTURE.as_uri())
+    row0 = page.locator(sel.SEL_CPT_ROWS).nth(0)
+    row0.locator(sel.SEL_CPT_POS).first.fill("02")
+    row0.locator(sel.SEL_CPT_MOD1).first.fill("95")
+    result = medicare_telehealth.apply(page, "9103000", _MEDICARE_DATA)
+    assert result.changed is True and result.review == "", result
+    assert not [c for c in result.changes if "before" in c], result.changes
+    assert [c for c in result.changes if c.get("added")], result.changes
+    assert medicare_telehealth.summary_comment(result).startswith(
+        "Medicare Telehealth (G2025 added; "), \
+        medicare_telehealth.summary_comment(result)
+
+
+def _seed_g2025(page, mod1):
+    """Put a G2025 row with the given M1 on hcfa_claim.html directly — the
+    same seeding as the already-present case above."""
+    page.evaluate(
+        """(mod1) => {
+            const tbody = document.querySelector(
+                '#claimCPTCodesTable8888888888888 tbody');
+            const addRowTr = tbody.querySelector('tr:last-child');
+            const tr = document.createElement('tr');
+            tr.id = 'CPTROW_3';
+            tr.innerHTML =
+                '<td><input data-fieldname="claimCPTCode" value="G2025" readonly></td>'
+              + '<td><input data-fieldname="ClaimCPTMOD1" value="' + mod1 + '"></td>'
+              + '<td><input data-fieldname="ClaimCPTBilledFee" value="25.00"></td>';
+            tbody.insertBefore(tr, addRowTr);
+        }""", mod1)
+
+
+@case
+def an_already_present_g2025_with_the_right_modifier_reads_ok(page):
+    """Review fix round 1: a pre-existing G2025's M1 is read back too."""
+    page.goto(HCFA_FIXTURE.as_uri())
+    _seed_g2025(page, "95")
+    g = claim_form.apply_medicare_telehealth_g2025(page, "95")
+    assert g["g2025_added"] is False and g["g2025_confirmed"] is True, g
+    assert g["g2025_present_modifier"] == "95", g
+    assert g["g2025_present_modifier_ok"] is True, g
+    assert g["g2025_modifier_ok"] is None, g
+
+
+@case
+def an_already_present_g2025_with_a_blank_modifier_is_sent_to_review(page):
+    """
+    Review fix round 1 (2026-10-05): G2025 already on the claim with a
+    blank M1. Before, its M1 was never read, and once nothing else was left
+    to change the log said "already correct … G2025 present" and the claim
+    passed. Now: the other rows are still cleaned up (G2025 IS on the
+    claim), but the result carries a review, a describe() line and a
+    summary comment naming the wrong M1 — and the M1 itself is left as is.
+    """
+    page.goto(HCFA_FIXTURE.as_uri())
+    _seed_g2025(page, "")
+    result = medicare_telehealth.apply(page, "9103000", _MEDICARE_DATA)
+    assert result.changed is True, result
+    assert result.review == "G2025 present but M1 is blank, not 95 — check it", \
+        result.review
+    zeroed = {c["code"] for c in result.changes if "fee" in c}
+    assert zeroed == {"99213", "J7298", "G8510"}, result.changes
+    assert [c for c in result.changes if c.get("mismatch")], result.changes
+
+    text = medicare_telehealth.describe(result)
+    assert "  G2025 already present but M1 is blank, not 95 — check it" \
+        in text, text
+    assert "G2025 present but M1 blank, not 95 — check it" in \
+        medicare_telehealth.summary_comment(result), \
+        medicare_telehealth.summary_comment(result)
+    g2025_row = page.locator(sel.SEL_CPT_ROWS).last
+    assert g2025_row.locator(sel.SEL_CPT_MOD1).first.input_value() == "", \
+        "a pre-existing G2025's modifier is read, never rewritten"
+
+
+@case
+def a_wrong_g2025_modifier_with_nothing_else_to_change_is_declined_not_none(page):
+    """
+    The exact case the reviewer named: the first apply adds G2025 (95) and
+    cleans up; then the G2025 M1 is blanked. The second apply has nothing
+    to change — but the claim does NOT follow rule #22, so it is declined
+    (a Review row), not none() (a Pass).
+    """
+    page.goto(HCFA_FIXTURE.as_uri())
+    first = medicare_telehealth.apply(page, "9103000", _MEDICARE_DATA)
+    assert first.changed is True and first.review == "", first
+    page.locator(sel.SEL_CPT_ROWS).last.locator(
+        sel.SEL_CPT_MOD1).first.fill("")
+    second = medicare_telehealth.apply(page, "9103000", _MEDICARE_DATA)
+    assert second == ConditionResult.declined(
+        "medicare_telehealth",
+        "G2025 present but M1 is blank, not 95 — check it"), second
+
+
+@case
+def a_95_g2025_on_an_audio_only_visit_is_sent_to_review(page):
+    """G2025 already present with 95, but the note is audio-only (93):
+    the primary row is moved to 93 and the G2025 mismatch goes to review."""
+    page.goto(HCFA_FIXTURE.as_uri())
+    _seed_g2025(page, "95")
+    data = {"progress_notes": {"text": "THV Audio Only: Telehealth audio "
+                                        "phone call only. No video."},
+            "insurance": [{"Name": "Humana Medicare"}]}
+    result = medicare_telehealth.apply(page, "9103000", data)
+    assert result.changed is True, result
+    assert result.review == "G2025 present but M1 is 95, not 93 — check it", \
+        result.review
+
+
+@case
+def a_primary_write_that_does_not_take_stops_before_g2025(page):
+    """
+    Review fix round 1 (2026-10-05): when the primary row's POS/M1 write
+    does not take, the claim is already known to be wrong — no G2025 add
+    and no other row zeroed/unchecked, just the changed primary row and a
+    review. Simulated by making set_cpt_pos_modifier report ok False.
+    """
+    page.goto(HCFA_FIXTURE.as_uri())
+    before_rows = page.locator(sel.SEL_CPT_ROWS).count()
+    before_fees = [page.locator(sel.SEL_CPT_ROWS).nth(i)
+                   .locator(sel.SEL_CPT_BILLED_FEE).first.input_value()
+                   for i in range(before_rows)]
+    original = claim_form.set_cpt_pos_modifier
+    claim_form.set_cpt_pos_modifier = lambda page, pos, modifier, only_first=False: [
+        {"row": 0, "code": "99213", "before": {"pos": "11", "mod1": ""},
+         "after": {"pos": "11", "mod1": ""}, "changed": True, "ok": False}]
+    try:
+        result = medicare_telehealth.apply(page, "9103000", _MEDICARE_DATA)
+    finally:
+        claim_form.set_cpt_pos_modifier = original
+    assert result.changed is True, result
+    assert result.review == (
+        "POS/modifier did not take on row 1 — set it by hand; G2025 was NOT "
+        "added and the other CPT rows were NOT unchecked"), result.review
+    assert [c["code"] for c in result.changes] == ["99213"], result.changes
+    assert not claim_form.cpt_code_present(page, "G2025"), \
+        "G2025 must not be added after a primary write that did not take"
+    assert page.locator(sel.SEL_CPT_ROWS).count() == before_rows
+    after_fees = [page.locator(sel.SEL_CPT_ROWS).nth(i)
+                  .locator(sel.SEL_CPT_BILLED_FEE).first.input_value()
+                  for i in range(before_rows)]
+    assert after_fees == before_fees, (before_fees, after_fees)
+    assert "did NOT take" in medicare_telehealth.describe(result)
+
+
+@case
+def describe_shows_the_mode_evidence(page):
+    page.goto(FIXTURE.as_uri())
+    data = {"progress_notes": {"text": "THV Audio Only: Telehealth audio "
+                                        "phone call only. No video."},
+            "insurance": [{"Name": "Humana Medicare"}]}
+    result = medicare_telehealth.apply(page, "9120000", data)
+    text = medicare_telehealth.describe(result)
+    assert 'mode audio (matched "Audio Only")' in text, text
+
+
+@case
+def a_live_grid_that_reads_empty_after_a_full_first_read_is_declined(page):
+    """Final review, 2026-10-05: as for telehealth — declined, not none()."""
+    from ecw_bot.conditions.base import CPT_GRID_NOT_READ
+    page.goto(FIXTURE.as_uri())
+    page.evaluate("""() => document.querySelectorAll('tr[id^="CPTROW_"]')
+                                  .forEach(r => r.remove())""")
+    result = medicare_telehealth.apply(
+        page, "9120000", dict(_MEDICARE_DATA, cpt=[{"code": "99213"}]))
+    assert result == ConditionResult.declined("medicare_telehealth",
+                                              CPT_GRID_NOT_READ), result
+
+
+@case
+def summary_comment_counts_unchecked_and_fee_only_rows_apart():
+    """
+    Final review, 2026-10-05: on the UB form only fees are zeroed, and
+    "N other CPT(s) unchecked/fee zeroed" suggested an uncheck that never
+    happened. Each kind is counted on its own. A blank M1 read-back names
+    the visit's modifier, never "?", and only the field that was fixed.
+    """
+    sc = medicare_telehealth.summary_comment
+    fee = lambda n: {"row": n, "code": f"9000{n}",
+                     "fee": {"before": "10.00", "after": "0.00"}}
+    both = lambda n: dict(fee(n), unchecked=True)
+    primary = {"row": 0, "code": "99213", "changed": True, "ok": False,
+               "before": {"pos": "2", "mod1": ""},
+               "after": {"pos": "2", "mod1": ""}, "modifier": "95"}
+    added = {"row": None, "code": "G2025", "added": True, "modifier": "95"}
+    r = ConditionResult("medicare_telehealth", True,
+                        [primary, added, fee(1), fee(2)])
+    text = sc(r)
+    assert text == ("Medicare Telehealth (modifier 95 on 99213 did NOT take "
+                    "— set by hand; G2025 added; 2 other CPT fee(s) "
+                    "zeroed)"), text
+    assert "unchecked" not in text and "?" not in text, text
+    r = ConditionResult("medicare_telehealth", True,
+                        [added, both(1), both(2)])
+    assert sc(r) == ("Medicare Telehealth (G2025 added; 2 other CPT(s) "
+                     "unchecked)"), sc(r)
+
+
+def _run_cases() -> int:
+    if not FIXTURE.exists():
+        print(f"  FAIL  fixture missing: {FIXTURE}")
+        return 1
+    try:
+        from playwright.sync_api import sync_playwright
+    except ImportError:
+        print("  SKIP  playwright is not installed")
+        return 0
+
+    failures = 0
+    with sync_playwright() as pw:
+        browser = pw.chromium.launch(headless=True)
+        page = browser.new_page()
+
+        for fn in CASES:
+            name = fn.__name__.replace("_", " ")
+            try:
+                if len(inspect.signature(fn).parameters) == 0:
+                    fn()
+                else:
+                    fn(page)
+                print(f"  ok    {name}")
+            except AssertionError as exc:
+                print(f"  FAIL  {name}: {exc}")
+                failures += 1
+            except Exception as exc:
+                print(f"  ERROR {name}: {type(exc).__name__}: {exc}")
+                failures += 1
+        browser.close()
+
+    print(f"\n{len(CASES) - failures}/{len(CASES)} passed")
+    return 1 if failures else 0
+
+
+def main() -> int:
+    from ecw_bot import settings as _cfg
+    # These cases exercise eCW's own click and Add flow, as a LIVE-WRITE run
+    # does. VERIFY clicks no box and adds no row (eCW saves both at once,
+    # 2026-10-16): that is tests/test_verify_no_live_writes.py.
+    orig = _cfg.SAVE_CORRECTIONS
+    _cfg.SAVE_CORRECTIONS = True
+    try:
+        return _run_cases()
+    finally:
+        _cfg.SAVE_CORRECTIONS = orig
+
+
+if __name__ == "__main__":
+    sys.exit(main())