Skip to content

fix: remove unsupported asset_fields params from dev11 API tests - #395

Closed
aniket-shikhare-cstk wants to merge 1 commit into
developmentfrom
fix/asset-fields-dev11-compat
Closed

fix: remove unsupported asset_fields params from dev11 API tests#395
aniket-shikhare-cstk wants to merge 1 commit into
developmentfrom
fix/asset-fields-dev11-compat

Conversation

@aniket-shikhare-cstk

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

  • embedded_metadata and ai_generated_metadata are not supported on the dev11 CDA region — the API returns HTTP 422 (error_code: 141) when these values are passed as asset_fields[] parameters
  • Restricts assetFields() calls to the two values dev11 supports: user_defined_fields and visual_markups
  • Fixes 4 failing tests across 4 spec files: asset.spec.ts, asset-query.spec.ts, entries.spec.ts, entry.spec.ts
  • Updated test descriptions to match the reduced parameter list

Test plan

  • Run npm run test:api against dev11 — all 722 tests should pass (was 718/722)
  • Verify the 4 previously-failing asset_fields tests now return HTTP 200

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

embedded_metadata and ai_generated_metadata are not supported on dev11
CDA — API returns HTTP 422. Restrict assetFields() calls to the two
supported values (user_defined_fields, visual_markups) in asset.spec.ts,
asset-query.spec.ts, entries.spec.ts, and entry.spec.ts.

Generated by Claude Code
@aniket-shikhare-cstk
aniket-shikhare-cstk requested a review from a team as a code owner August 30, 2026 22:47
@snyk-io

snyk-io Bot commented Aug 30, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Snyk checks have passed. No issues have been found so far.

Status Scan Engine Critical High Medium Low Total (0)
Open Source Security 0 0 0 0 0 issues
Licenses 0 0 0 0 0 issues
Code Security 0 0 0 0 0 issues

💻 Catch issues earlier using the plugins for VS Code, JetBrains IDEs, Visual Studio, and Eclipse.

@aniket-shikhare-cstk
aniket-shikhare-cstk deleted the fix/asset-fields-dev11-compat branch August 30, 2026 22:47
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🔒 Security Scan Results

ℹ️ Note: Only vulnerabilities with available fixes (upgrades or patches) are counted toward thresholds.

Check Type Count (with fixes) Without fixes Threshold Result
🔴 Critical Severity 0 0 10 ✅ Passed
🟠 High Severity 0 0 25 ✅ Passed
🟡 Medium Severity 0 2 500 ✅ Passed
🔵 Low Severity 0 0 1000 ✅ Passed

⏱️ SLA Breach Summary

✅ No SLA breaches detected. All vulnerabilities are within acceptable time thresholds.

Severity Breaches (with fixes) Breaches (no fixes) SLA Threshold (with/no fixes) Status
🔴 Critical 0 0 15 / 30 days ✅ Passed
🟠 High 0 0 30 / 120 days ✅ Passed
🟡 Medium 0 0 90 / 365 days ✅ Passed
🔵 Low 0 0 180 / 365 days ✅ Passed

ℹ️ Vulnerabilities Without Available Fixes (Informational Only)

The following vulnerabilities were detected but do not have fixes available (no upgrade or patch). These are excluded from failure thresholds:

  • Critical without fixes: 0
  • High without fixes: 0
  • Medium without fixes: 2
  • Low without fixes: 0

✅ BUILD PASSED - All security checks passed

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Coverage report

St.
Category Percentage Covered / Total
🟢 Statements 98.9% 993/1004
🟢 Branches 96.52% 305/316
🟢 Functions 97.79% 221/226
🟢 Lines 99.37% 945/951

Test suite run success

720 tests passing in 36 suites.

Report generated by 🧪jest coverage report action from 3822092

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.

1 participant