• 10 random tests are not enough to prevent false positive solutions.
• Edge cases should be specifically tested.

In sample test at 'add_cash' ans is 'Jeff has 118', but in really 'Jeff has 88' *In python

This Kata was fun. But it had confusing wording regarding the "check" method in the instructions.
It me a while to figure out that check really meant tranffer money to from a user to another user.
Not, check the status. Another way of thinking of it is like "writing a check" to another user.
Maybe use give_money or transfer_money woudld be better names for this method.

I have these error when attempting...

"Joe's checking account is disabled.
Log
Raise a ValueError
Jeff doesn't have enough money.
Log
Raise a ValueError
Joe can't withdraw 50, he only has 40"

I tried different ways and I don't know how to enable Joe checking_account?

Very Nice Kata , I learnd a lot From It Ty .

Python: the random test assumes the class must have a public property named balance (or its getter), but it's not specified anywhere in the Kata description. The tests should not rely on the implementation.

Fix: https://www.codewars.com/kumite/64b57ce627f2c91a8a97f07f?sel=64b57ce627f2c91a8a97f07f

OP solved it, closing

This statement --> Raise a ValueError if there isn't enough money to withdraw should be clear enough, not a kata issue!

not a kata suggestion

Python: tests have dependencies between test cases, Fixed tests depend on the state created by Sample tests.

Done.

I agree. I didn't understand what "check" was at first. After looking at the examples, I could see it was ACTUALLY just a money transfer with an account balance and authorisation check between the 2 people. After I realised that, I solved it in minutes.

As a non native English speaker, I agree with @blopezpi. And after looking at the docstrings of some of the solutions, others felt the need to clarify what this method does.