docs(doc): clarify history edit time format

[liuxin-0319]

Summary

Clarify the actual edit_time wire format returned by the Docs history OpenAPI so time-based history selection does not rely on the stale Unix timestamp example.

Changes

• Document entries[].edit_time as a UTC RFC3339 string.
• Update the history-list response example to use RFC3339.

Test Plan

• git diff --check
• Confirmed the ai_edit OpenAPI layer formats edit_time with time.RFC3339.
• Confirmed a live docs +history-list response returns RFC3339.

Related Issues

• None

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation
  • Clarified that history edit times use RFC3339 UTC timestamp strings.
  • Updated the example response to show the correct timestamp format.
  • Added guidance to parse timestamps before comparing them.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: c19e30f4-ef5f-4d81-a8ef-ee6bc6484d1a

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 7b98994 and 048ef51.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• skills/lark-doc/references/lark-doc-history.md

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The lark-doc history reference now documents entries[].edit_time as an RFC3339 UTC string and updates the +history-list example to use that format.

Changes

History timestamp documentation

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Timestamp format and example skills/lark-doc/references/lark-doc-history.md	Defines edit_time as an RFC3339 UTC string, requires parsing before comparisons, and updates the example response value.

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes

Suggested reviewers: liangshuo-1

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly and concisely matches the PR's main change: clarifying the history edit time format.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description follows the template with Summary, Changes, Test Plan, and Related Issues sections filled in.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch fix/docs-history-edit-time-format

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[github-actions]

🚀 PR Preview Install Guide

🧰 CLI update

npm i -g https://pkg.pr.new/larksuite/cli/@larksuite/cli@048ef51694a109a6ee7978b8bb886269a826a41a

🧩 Skill update

npx skills add larksuite/cli#fix/docs-history-edit-time-format -y -g

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 74.98%. Comparing base (7b98994) to head (048ef51).
⚠️ Report is 15 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1962   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   74.98%   74.98%           
=======================================
  Files         895      895           
  Lines       94379    94379           
=======================================
  Hits        70767    70767           
  Misses      18197    18197           
  Partials     5415     5415           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.