Skip to content

feat(gooddata-sdk): [AUTO] Add filter_context to ObjectType enum in gen-ai#1549

Closed
yenkins-admin wants to merge 2 commits intomasterfrom
auto/openapi-sync-C016-20260419-r33866
Closed

feat(gooddata-sdk): [AUTO] Add filter_context to ObjectType enum in gen-ai#1549
yenkins-admin wants to merge 2 commits intomasterfrom
auto/openapi-sync-C016-20260419-r33866

Conversation

@yenkins-admin
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

Added "filter_context" to the ObjectType enum documentation in the search_ai() method docstring in compute/service.py. The OpenAPI diff adds filter_context as a valid ObjectType enum value in the gen-ai service. The only SDK wrapper change needed was updating the docstring that lists the valid enum values, since the method already accepts list[str] without additional SDK-level validation.

Impact: enum_addition | Services: gen-ai

Files changed

  • packages/gooddata-sdk/src/gooddata_sdk/compute/service.py

Agent decisions

Decisions (1)

scope of change — Docstring-only update in compute/service.py

  • Alternatives: Add Literal type alias for object types, Add SDK-level validation of object_types values
  • Why: The method already accepts list[str] for object_types with no SDK-level enum validation — the API client handles validation. Adding a Literal type or validation would be a more invasive change beyond the scope of this enum addition. Other enum additions in the codebase follow the same pattern of documenting values in docstrings only.
Assumptions to verify (2)
  • The auto-generated gooddata-api-client will be regenerated separately to add filter_context to search_request.py and chat_request.py allowed_values dicts.
  • The filter_context value in the ObjectType enum is only relevant to the search_ai() method (not to generate_description_request or generate_title_request, which have a different object_type enum with capitalized values).
Layers touched (1)
  • public_api — Updated docstring for search_ai() to document the new filter_context enum value in the object_types parameter.
    • packages/gooddata-sdk/src/gooddata_sdk/compute/service.py

Source commits (gdc-nas)

  • 78f7152 feat(gen-ai): refactor metadata generation and filter handling (#21356)
OpenAPI diff
diff --git a/microservices/gen-ai/src/test/resources/openapi/open-api-spec.json b/microservices/gen-ai/src/test/resources/openapi/open-api-spec.json
@@ -591,7 +591,8 @@
           "date_attribute",
           "label",
           "visualization",
-          "dashboard"
+          "dashboard",
+          "filter_context"
         ],
         "title": "ObjectType",
         "type": "string"

Workflow run


Generated by SDK OpenAPI Sync workflow

@codecov
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov bot commented Apr 19, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 78.66%. Comparing base (37d0593) to head (3dd5df6).

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1549   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   78.66%   78.66%           
=======================================
  Files         230      230           
  Lines       15405    15405           
=======================================
  Hits        12118    12118           
  Misses       3287     3287           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 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.

The implement agent writes its message log to transcript-implement-C016.jsonl.
This file was accidentally committed by 'git add -A' in the deliver step of
sdk-py-openapi-sync.yml (gdc-nas).  The workflow has been patched to write
transcripts outside the sdk/ checkout so future auto-PRs won't contain them.

Attempted to do this via the review-fix workflow as a first-run test of that
pipeline; the agent correctly identified the file but the security hook
blocks all file deletion primitives (git rm, os.remove, etc.) — that is by
design for the review-fix scope, so needs_manual fell through to here.
@tychtjan tychtjan closed this Apr 20, 2026
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