diff --git a/src/lib/server/order-order-duplicate-link-service.test.ts b/src/lib/server/order-order-duplicate-link-service.test.ts
index 185dc4a..95b2dcf 100644
--- a/src/lib/server/order-order-duplicate-link-service.test.ts
+++ b/src/lib/server/order-order-duplicate-link-service.test.ts
@@ -17,7 +17,11 @@ const { store, pbMock, clearStore } = vi.hoisted(() => {
     const clauses = filter.split("&&").map((c) => c.trim());
     return items.filter((item) =>
       clauses.every((clause) => {
-        const m = clause.match(/^(\w+)\s*([!=<>]+)\s*"?([^"]+)"?$/);
+        // Mock-only filter parser: accepts the four operators the
+        // duplicate-matcher uses (=, !=, >=, plus the lex variants
+        // <, <=, >). Anything else silently passes through so a
+        // typo in a clause doesn't 500 the test.
+        const m = clause.match(/^(\w+)\s*([!=]+|>=|<=|>|<)\s*"?([^"]+)"?$/);
         if (!m) return true;
         const [, field, op, raw] = m;
         const value = raw.replace(/^"|"$/g, "");
@@ -204,6 +208,14 @@ describe("suggestOrderDuplicate", () => {
     const result = await suggestOrderDuplicate("order-mine");
 
     expect(result.duplicateOrderId).toBeNull();
+    // Symmetric contract: no-match branch still stamps the
+    // _matching_attempted flag so a UI / external scan can distinguish
+    // "we tried and found nothing" from "we never looked".
+    const updated = await pbMock.collection("orders").getOne("order-mine");
+    expect(updated.duplicate_order_matching_attempted).toBe(true);
+    expect(updated.duplicate_order_match_method).toBe("no_match");
+    expect(updated.duplicate_order_match_confidence).toBe(0);
+    expect(updated.potential_duplicate_order).toBeFalsy();
   });
 
   it("does not flag when the matching order is older than 60 days", async () => {
@@ -221,6 +233,11 @@ describe("suggestOrderDuplicate", () => {
     const result = await suggestOrderDuplicate("order-mine");
 
     expect(result.duplicateOrderId).toBeNull();
+    const updated = await pbMock.collection("orders").getOne("order-mine");
+    expect(updated.duplicate_order_matching_attempted).toBe(true);
+    expect(updated.duplicate_order_match_method).toBe("no_match");
+    expect(updated.duplicate_order_match_confidence).toBe(0);
+    expect(updated.potential_duplicate_order).toBeFalsy();
   });
 
   it("does not flag when item quantities differ", async () => {
@@ -238,6 +255,11 @@ describe("suggestOrderDuplicate", () => {
     const result = await suggestOrderDuplicate("order-b");
 
     expect(result.duplicateOrderId).toBeNull();
+    const updated = await pbMock.collection("orders").getOne("order-b");
+    expect(updated.duplicate_order_matching_attempted).toBe(true);
+    expect(updated.duplicate_order_match_method).toBe("no_match");
+    expect(updated.duplicate_order_match_confidence).toBe(0);
+    expect(updated.potential_duplicate_order).toBeFalsy();
   });
 
   it("never matches an order against itself", async () => {
@@ -250,5 +272,61 @@ describe("suggestOrderDuplicate", () => {
     const result = await suggestOrderDuplicate("order-solo");
 
     expect(result.duplicateOrderId).toBeNull();
+    const updated = await pbMock.collection("orders").getOne("order-solo");
+    expect(updated.duplicate_order_matching_attempted).toBe(true);
+    expect(updated.duplicate_order_match_method).toBe("no_match");
+    expect(updated.duplicate_order_match_confidence).toBe(0);
+    expect(updated.potential_duplicate_order).toBeFalsy();
+  });
+
+  it("does not flag when the matching order is just past the 60-day window", async () => {
+    // 2026-08-30T12:00:00Z - 61d = 2026-06-30T12:00:00Z, just one day
+    // outside the inclusive `created >= cutoff` window. This pins
+    // the boundary actually being enforced — without it, a bug that
+    // drops the `>=` clause would still pass the 90-day-old test.
+    await seedOrderWithItems(
+      "order-edge",
+      { order_number: "ORD-A", company: "comp-1", created: "2026-06-30 12:00:00.000Z" },
+      [{ description: "M16x50 Bolt", quantity: 300 }],
+    );
+    await seedOrderWithItems(
+      "order-mine",
+      { order_number: "ORD-B", company: "comp-1", created: "2026-08-30 00:00:00.000Z" },
+      [{ description: "M16x50 Bolt", quantity: 300 }],
+    );
+
+    const result = await suggestOrderDuplicate("order-mine");
+
+    expect(result.duplicateOrderId).toBeNull();
+    const updated = await pbMock.collection("orders").getOne("order-mine");
+    expect(updated.duplicate_order_matching_attempted).toBe(true);
+    expect(updated.duplicate_order_match_method).toBe("no_match");
+    expect(updated.potential_duplicate_order).toBeFalsy();
+  });
+
+  it("flags when the matching order is within the 60-day window (boundary positive control)", async () => {
+    // 2026-08-30T12:00:00Z - 60d = 2026-07-01T12:00:00Z. The candidate
+    // lands exactly on the inclusive boundary of `created >= cutoff`,
+    // so it must be matched. Pairs with the just-past-the-window
+    // test above to pin the boundary from both sides.
+    await seedOrderWithItems(
+      "order-edge-in",
+      { order_number: "ORD-A", company: "comp-1", created: "2026-07-01 12:00:00.000Z" },
+      [{ description: "M16x50 Bolt", quantity: 300 }],
+    );
+    await seedOrderWithItems(
+      "order-mine",
+      { order_number: "ORD-B", company: "comp-1", created: "2026-08-30 00:00:00.000Z" },
+      [{ description: "M16x50 Bolt", quantity: 300 }],
+    );
+
+    const result = await suggestOrderDuplicate("order-mine");
+
+    expect(result.duplicateOrderId).toBe("order-edge-in");
+    const updated = await pbMock.collection("orders").getOne("order-mine");
+    expect(updated.duplicate_order_matching_attempted).toBe(true);
+    expect(updated.duplicate_order_match_method).toBe("exact_items_same_company");
+    expect(updated.duplicate_order_match_confidence).toBe(1);
+    expect(updated.potential_duplicate_order).toBe("order-edge-in");
   });
 });