Document audit log search and export#416
Conversation
![cursor[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1210556?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Risk assessment: Very Low.
Evidence from the diff: this PR adds info/audit-logs.mdx and a single docs.json navigation entry. It doesn’t modify runtime code, prompts/model instructions, auth or permissions logic, infrastructure, schemas, or shared production systems. The change is documentation-only with limited blast radius.
I also found no CODEOWNERS file in the repo snapshot and the PR metadata showed no existing approvals, so approval is allowed under the risk policy.
Sent by Cursor Automation: Assign PR reviewers
|
Preview deployment for your docs. Learn more about Mintlify Previews.
💡 Tip: Enable Workflows to automatically generate PRs for you. |
Filters narrow results, not the time window; add --include to the HTTP paging examples so the X-Next-Page-Token response header is visible.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Risk assessment: Very Low.
Evidence from the diff: the PR adds info/audit-logs.mdx and a single docs.json navigation entry. It doesn’t modify runtime code, prompt/model instruction files, auth or permissions logic, infrastructure, schemas, or shared production systems. The blast radius is limited to documentation rendering/navigation.
I found no CODEOWNERS file in the repo snapshot. The PR is already approved according to GitHub review state, so I’m not adding a duplicate approval.
Sent by Cursor Automation: Assign PR reviewers
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Risk assessment: Very Low.
Evidence from the current diff: this PR adds info/audit-logs.mdx and one docs.json navigation entry. The latest update only adds/clarifies audit log documentation text, including the 30-day range note, filter wording, and curl --include examples. It doesn’t modify runtime code, prompt/model instruction files, auth or permissions logic, infrastructure, schemas, or shared production systems.
I found no CODEOWNERS file in the repo snapshot. The PR is already approved according to GitHub review state, so I’m not adding a duplicate approval. The post-approval update doesn’t increase risk, so no approval dismissal is needed.
Sent by Cursor Automation: Assign PR reviewers
yummybomb
changed the title
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Risk assessment: Very Low.
Evidence from the current diff: this PR changes four documentation-site files only. It adds audit-log search/export guides and CLI reference content, plus two navigation/card entries in docs.json and reference/cli.mdx. It doesn't modify runtime code, model instruction files, authentication or permissions enforcement, infrastructure, schemas, or production services. The blast radius is limited to rendered documentation and navigation.
The latest post-approval update expands the documentation and examples but doesn't increase operational or security risk. No CODEOWNERS file is present in the repository, and GitHub already reports the PR as approved, so I haven't added a duplicate approval or dismissed the existing approval.
Sent by Cursor Automation: Assign PR reviewers
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Risk assessment: Very Low.
Evidence from the current diff: all changes are confined to four Mintlify documentation files. The latest update only reorganizes the audit-log guide, refines CLI/API wording and examples, and corrects reference links/table formatting. It doesn't modify runtime code, model instruction files, authentication or permission enforcement, infrastructure, schemas, or production services. The blast radius remains limited to rendered documentation and navigation.
No CODEOWNERS file is present in the repository. GitHub already reports this PR as approved, so I haven't added a duplicate approval. The post-approval update doesn't increase risk, so the existing approval remains appropriate.
Sent by Cursor Automation: Assign PR reviewers
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Risk assessment: Very Low.
Evidence from the current diff: all changes remain confined to four Mintlify documentation files—two new audit-log guides plus navigation/card entries. The newest update changes one sentence and removes a short prerequisite note in info/audit-logs.mdx; it doesn't add runtime behavior or affect authentication/permission enforcement, infrastructure, schemas, prompts, or production services. The blast radius is limited to rendered documentation.
No CODEOWNERS file is present in the repository. GitHub already reports the PR as approved, so I haven't added a duplicate approval. This post-approval update doesn't increase risk, so the existing approval remains appropriate.
Sent by Cursor Automation: Assign PR reviewers
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Risk assessment: Very Low.
The current diff is confined to four Mintlify documentation files: two audit-log documentation pages plus navigation/card entries. The latest update only expands the SDK examples to iterate through all export chunks and adds checksum/cursor guidance. It doesn't modify runtime code, model instruction files, authentication or permission enforcement, infrastructure, schemas, or production services, so the blast radius remains limited to rendered documentation.
No CODEOWNERS file is present at the PR head. GitHub already reports the PR as approved, so I haven't added a duplicate approval. The post-approval update doesn't increase risk, so the existing approval remains appropriate.
Sent by Cursor Automation: Assign PR reviewers
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Risk assessment: Very Low.
The complete diff remains confined to four Mintlify documentation files: two audit-log guides and two navigation/card updates. The latest post-approval update only reorganizes and trims info/audit-logs.mdx; it doesn't modify runtime code, model instruction files, authentication or permission enforcement, infrastructure, schemas, or production services. The blast radius is limited to rendered documentation.
No CODEOWNERS file is present in the repository, and GitHub already reports the PR as approved. I haven't added a duplicate approval, and because the update doesn't increase risk, the existing approval remains appropriate.
Sent by Cursor Automation: Assign PR reviewers
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Risk assessment: Very Low.
The complete diff remains confined to four Mintlify documentation files: two audit-log guides plus navigation/card entries. The newest update only removes duplicated raw HTTP examples, retitles two sections, and links to the API reference; it doesn't modify runtime code, model instruction files, authentication or permission enforcement, infrastructure, schemas, or production services. The blast radius remains limited to rendered documentation.
No CODEOWNERS file is present in the repository. GitHub already reports the PR as approved, so I haven't added a duplicate approval. This post-approval update doesn't increase risk, so the existing approval remains appropriate.
Sent by Cursor Automation: Assign PR reviewers
…docs patterns - Use full request/response schema phrasing consistent with projects and other info pages - Clarify CLI vs API/SDK default GET exclusion in filter docs - Link CLI and API reference in intro with consistent wording - Fix CLI flag output description to 'Output raw JSON array' to match browsers, proxies, profiles, api-keys reference pages - Note export cursor retry and checksum verification matches CLI download behavior
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Risk assessment: Very Low.
The complete diff is limited to four Mintlify documentation files: two audit-log documentation pages plus navigation/card entries. The latest post-approval update only clarifies SDK, CLI, and API descriptions and GET-filter behavior; it doesn't modify runtime code, model instruction files, authentication or permission enforcement, infrastructure, schemas, or production services. The blast radius remains limited to rendered documentation.
No CODEOWNERS file is present in the repository. GitHub already reports this PR as approved, so I haven't added a duplicate approval. This update doesn't increase risk, so the existing approval remains appropriate.
Sent by Cursor Automation: Assign PR reviewers
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Risk assessment: Very Low.
The complete diff remains confined to four Mintlify documentation files: two audit-log guides plus navigation/card entries. The latest post-approval update revises SDK examples, export-loop guidance, filter wording, and CLI download behavior; it doesn't modify runtime code, model instruction files, authentication or permission enforcement, infrastructure, schemas, or production services. The blast radius remains limited to rendered documentation.
No CODEOWNERS file is present in the repository. GitHub still reports this PR as approved, so I haven't added a duplicate approval. This update doesn't increase risk, so the existing approval remains appropriate.
Sent by Cursor Automation: Assign PR reviewers
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Risk assessment: Very Low.
The complete diff is limited to four Mintlify documentation files: two audit-log documentation pages plus navigation/card entries. The latest post-approval update changes only the frontmatter description in info/audit-logs.mdx; it doesn't modify runtime code, model instruction files, authentication or permission enforcement, infrastructure, schemas, or production services. The blast radius remains limited to rendered documentation.
No CODEOWNERS file is present in the repository. GitHub already reports this PR as approved, so I haven't added a duplicate approval. This update doesn't increase risk, so the existing approval remains appropriate.
Sent by Cursor Automation: Assign PR reviewers
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Risk assessment: Very Low.
The complete diff remains confined to four Mintlify documentation files: two audit-log documentation pages plus navigation/card entries. The latest post-approval update only removes three limit fields from SDK examples in info/audit-logs.mdx; it doesn't modify runtime code, model instruction files, authentication or permission enforcement, infrastructure, schemas, or production services. The blast radius remains limited to rendered documentation.
No CODEOWNERS file is present in the repository. GitHub reports the PR as already approved, so I haven't added a duplicate approval. This update doesn't increase risk, so the existing approval remains appropriate.
Sent by Cursor Automation: Assign PR reviewers
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Risk assessment: Very Low.
The complete diff remains confined to four Mintlify documentation files: two audit-log documentation pages plus navigation/card entries. The latest post-approval update changes eight lines of CLI flag and GET-filter wording in reference/cli/audit-logs.mdx; it doesn't modify runtime code, model instruction files, authentication or permission enforcement, infrastructure, schemas, or production services. The blast radius remains limited to rendered documentation.
No CODEOWNERS file is present in the repository. GitHub already reports this PR as approved, so I haven't added a duplicate approval. This update doesn't increase risk, so the existing approval remains appropriate.
Sent by Cursor Automation: Assign PR reviewers
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Risk assessment: Very Low.
The complete diff remains limited to four Mintlify documentation files: two audit-log pages plus navigation/card entries. Since the previous assessment, only three sentences in info/audit-logs.mdx were clarified; no runtime code, model instructions, authentication or permission enforcement, infrastructure, schemas, or production services changed. The blast radius remains limited to rendered documentation, so the update doesn't increase risk.
No CODEOWNERS file is present in the repository. GitHub already reports the PR as approved, so I haven't added a duplicate approval or dismissed the existing approval.
Sent by Cursor Automation: Assign PR reviewers
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Risk assessment: Very Low.
The complete diff remains confined to four Mintlify documentation files: two audit-log pages plus navigation/card entries. Since the previous assessment, only two filter descriptions in info/audit-logs.mdx were clarified; no runtime code, model instructions, authentication or permission enforcement, infrastructure, schemas, or production services changed. The blast radius remains limited to rendered documentation, so this update doesn't increase risk.
No CODEOWNERS file is present in the repository. GitHub already reports the PR as approved, so I haven't added a duplicate approval or dismissed the existing approval.
Sent by Cursor Automation: Assign PR reviewers
1 participant
Summary
kernel audit-logsCLI command reference and navigation entryexclude_methodexamples and replace the fabricated page token with an opaque response tokenRollout
Keep this PR in draft until:
kernel audit-logs downloadTesting
mint broken-links/info/audit-logsand/reference/cli/audit-logswith the local Mintlify previewgo test ./cmd -run AuditLogsin the CLI repository