Skip to content

fix(sdk): preserve metadata list request scope - #755

Closed
RerankerGuo wants to merge 1 commit into
TencentCloud:feat/server_teamfrom
RerankerGuo:fix/ts-metadata-pagination-scope
Closed

fix(sdk): preserve metadata list request scope#755
RerankerGuo wants to merge 1 commit into
TencentCloud:feat/server_teamfrom
RerankerGuo:fix/ts-metadata-pagination-scope

Conversation

@RerankerGuo

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Description | 描述

The TypeScript metadata SDK's positional list overloads previously spread the
pagination object after authoritative identity fields. JavaScript callers, or
TypeScript callers using a cast, could therefore supply runtime extras such as
team_id, user_id, or asset_id and redirect a request away from the scope
specified by the positional argument.

This change narrows positional pagination serialization to the declared
limit and offset fields, then writes identity and status arguments last.
Regression coverage verifies all eight affected list methods at the transport
boundary.

Scope is limited to positional convenience overloads. Request-object overloads,
public types, endpoint paths, and valid pagination behavior are unchanged.

Related Issue | 关联 Issue

No linked issue. This defect was found during an SDK request-serialization
audit.

Change Type | 修改类型

  • Bug fix | Bug 修复
  • New feature | 新功能
  • Documentation update | 文档更新
  • Code optimization | 代码优化

Self-test Checklist | 自测清单

  • Verified locally | 本地验证通过
  • No existing features affected | 无影响现有功能

Additional Notes | 其他说明

Validation:

  • npm test -- tests/v3-metadata-pagination-scope.test.ts (8 passed)
  • npm test (8 passed)
  • npm run build
  • npm pack --dry-run --json (44 files)
  • git diff --check

Restrict positional list pagination to limit and offset, then serialize authoritative identity and status fields last so runtime extras cannot redirect a request to another scope.

Test: npm test
Test: npm run build
Test: npm pack --dry-run --json
Signed-off-by: RerankerGuo <121015044+RerankerGuo@users.noreply.github.com>
@Maxwell-Code07

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Hi @RerankerGuo !
Thanks a lot for your hard work!
We noticed you submitted 70 consecutive PRs today, the quantity is quite unusual. Could you confirm whether these PRs are bulk-generated by AI?

@RerankerGuo

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Hi @Maxwell-Code07, yes. These contributions were prepared with AI-assisted coding tools under my supervision. I used the tools for repository analysis, implementation, and test generation, while checking each patch against the current feat/server_team branch, searching active PRs for overlap, running focused/local verification, and keeping each PR single-purpose with DCO sign-off.

I understand that the submission volume creates a substantial review burden. I will pause additional submissions to this repository while the existing batch is reviewed, prioritize responding to maintainer feedback, and close or consolidate anything you identify as duplicate or outside the project roadmap. Thanks for raising this directly.

@RerankerGuo

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Follow-up on the August 3 batch: I completed a contributor-side cleanup to reduce maintainer review burden. I am closing this PR and the other non-retained submissions, and will keep only #179, #182, and #193 active because they have the strongest independent validation or prior maintainer signal. I will limit further work here to rebasing, testing, and responding to feedback on those three PRs. Thanks again for raising the submission volume concern directly.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants