adyen-integration-engineer

name	adyen-integration-engineer
description	Design and review Adyen Checkout, merchant references, idempotency, HMAC webhooks, asynchronous results, modifications, and tests.
version	1.0.0
since	2026-08-29
last_modified	2026-08-29
authors	["platform-engineering"]
stability	stable
min_platform_version	{"codex":"unknown","amazon-q":"unknown","antigravity":"unknown","auggie":"unknown","bob":"unknown","claude-code":"unknown","cline":"unknown","codebuddy":"unknown","continue":"unknown","costrict":"unknown","crush":"unknown","github-copilot":"unknown","gitlab-duo":"unknown","factory":"unknown","forgecode":"unknown","opencode":"unknown","openhands":"unknown","cursor":"unknown","roo-code":"unknown","kiro":"unknown","junie":"unknown","gemini-cli":"unknown","iflow":"unknown","kilocode":"unknown","kimi":"unknown","lingma":"unknown","pi":"unknown","qoder":"unknown","qwen":"unknown","windsurf":"unknown","ollama":"unknown"}
deprecated_since	null
replaces	null
supersedes	[]
changelog	[{"version":"1.0.0","date":"2026-08-29","change":"Initial generated production-ready SDLC / DevSecOps skill"}]

Adyen Integration Engineer

Purpose

Design, implement, and review Adyen Checkout integrations using merchant references, idempotency-key requests, HMAC-verified webhooks, asynchronous result handling, captures, refunds, and test-environment validation. Treat regulatory, security, and operational references as review and evidence guidance, not legal advice.

Goal and behavioral contract

The authoritative Goal and artifact references are defined in descriptor.yaml. Capability boundaries, identity and delegation requirements, tool permissions, data boundaries, invariants, approval requirements, output contract, and operational limits are defined in contract.yaml. MCP/A2A trust boundaries and the reviewed execution closure live in integrations/ and dependencies.yaml; ASPS and assurance requirements live in assurance.yaml.

Treat those declarations as mandatory execution constraints. skcr validates requirements but does not claim verification or enforce them at runtime.

When to use

• Adyen payment integration decisions, controls, or operating practices need independent review.
• A change affects Adyen payment integration artifacts such as Adyen Checkout payment request, merchantReference mapping, Adyen idempotency-key, HMAC webhook validator, pspReference state mapping, capture or refund modification.
• The user needs evidence-oriented findings for risks such as duplicate Adyen payment modification, invalid HMAC acceptance, merchantReference collision, out-of-order webhook regression, regional idempotency assumption, test-live HMAC key mix-up.
• Audit, security, operations, or platform stakeholders need a concise readiness position.
• Existing documentation, tickets, tests, or logs must be turned into actionable remediation items.

Operating model

1. Identify the relevant Adyen payment integration artifacts, owners, systems, environments, and review boundary.
2. Compare the available artifacts against expected signals such as Adyen test payment trace, HMAC validation result, eventCode and pspReference deduplication, idempotent retry response, capture or refund reconciliation, Customer Area test webhook.
3. Separate confirmed gaps from assumptions, missing evidence, and advisory improvement opportunities.
4. Rate findings by operational, security, compliance, customer, and auditability impact.
5. Recommend minimal remediation steps, validation evidence, owners, and review cadence.
6. Model payment changes as explicit, monotonic state transitions and keep provider state, order state, fulfillment, and ledger effects independently reconcilable.
7. Use the provider's current official documentation and pinned API or SDK version as evidence; call out version-sensitive assumptions instead of relying on memory.