Skip to content

feature/INT-1701 - Representative documents alignment - #467

Open
david-ruiz-cko wants to merge 2 commits into
masterfrom
feature/INT-1701
Open

david-ruiz-cko wants to merge 2 commits into
masterfrom
feature/INT-1701

Conversation

@david-ruiz-cko

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This pull request significantly improves the documentation and test coverage for the Platforms API integration, with a special focus on onboarding sub-entities and uploading identity documents. The changes clarify how to use the API, especially regarding the handling of representative documents, and enhance tests to ensure correct behavior for file uploads and document submission.

Documentation improvements:

  • Expanded and clarified JSDoc comments for PlatformFiles and Subentity classes, detailing required fields, API endpoints, and the handling of representative and top-level documents, including strictness and validation differences. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

Test coverage enhancements:

  • Added comprehensive tests for representative documents (including identity verification, proof of address, proof of registration, and certified authorised signatory) in onboarding and updating sub-entities, ensuring the SDK sends the correct structure to the API unchanged.
  • Added a test to verify that the correct purpose values are sent in multipart file uploads for representative documents.

Consistency and correctness:

  • Updated test cases to use the correct purpose value (identity_verification instead of identification) for file uploads, aligning with API requirements. [1] [2] [3]

These changes ensure developers have clear guidance on how to use the API and confidence that the SDK handles documents and file uploads as required by the platform.

@david-ruiz-cko
david-ruiz-cko requested a review from a team October 1, 2026 16:13
@agent-wall-e

agent-wall-e Bot commented Oct 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🟢 Risk Classification: LOW

Approval route: AI Auto-Approval
Rollback controls: Automated Instant Rollback + feature flags

Classification reasons

  • no_low_class_matched
  • prod_source_modified
  • 2.2.6_logical_extension:The PR only adds JSDoc comments and updates test fixture values (correcting a purpose string), with no logic, endpoint, auth, data persistence, or behavioral changes.

Operational gates

  • ✅ jira_ticket (INT-1701)
  • ✅ independent_review

Files analysed: 4


wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · policy 6b4ce2b3b45a…

@agent-wall-e

agent-wall-e Bot commented Oct 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
🔬 Debug — why this classification?

Each reason code emitted by the classifier, its source clause in the AI in SDLC Control Framework, and what it means.

Reason code Kind Clause Meaning
no_low_class_matched informational §2.2 (fall-through) None of the deterministic Low classes (§2.2.3, §2.2.4, §2.2.7, docs-only) applied; classifier fell through to LLM evaluation.
prod_source_modified informational §2.1 M7 (informational) At least one file is non-doc, non-test, non-IaC — i.e. application source code was modified.
2.2.6_logical_extension — The PR only adds JSDoc comments and updates test fixture values (correcting a purpose string), with no logic, endpoint, auth, data persistence, or behavioral changes. classifying §2.2.6 Sonnet 4.6 evaluator promoted minor → low: the change reuses existing code paths and does not cross a trust boundary.

Kinds:

  • classifying — this rule contributed to the chosen tier.
  • informational — context only; did not by itself decide the tier.

See issue #3 for the proposal to formalise this map as Appendix A of the standards doc.

wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · debug

@agent-wall-e agent-wall-e Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

✅ Auto-approved — this PR meets all Low-risk criteria.

All checks passed, no unresolved comments, and the change classification is:

  • no_low_class_matched
  • prod_source_modified
  • 2.2.6_logical_extension:The PR only adds JSDoc comments and updates test fixtures/assertions (correcting a purpose string value), with no logic, endpoint, data model, or auth changes.

wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · policy 6b4ce2b3b45a…

@agent-wall-e

agent-wall-e Bot commented Oct 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🟢 Risk Classification: LOW

Approval route: AI Auto-Approval
Rollback controls: Automated Instant Rollback + feature flags

Classification reasons

  • no_low_class_matched
  • prod_source_modified
  • 2.2.6_logical_extension:The diff contains only JSDoc comment expansions, inline documentation comments on existing methods, and test corrections (fixing a string value from 'identification' to 'identity_verification'), with no new endpoints, data classes, auth changes, or behavioral logic introduced.

Operational gates

  • ✅ jira_ticket (INT-1701)
  • ✅ independent_review

Files analysed: 5


wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · policy 6b4ce2b3b45a…

@agent-wall-e

agent-wall-e Bot commented Oct 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
🔬 Debug — why this classification?

Each reason code emitted by the classifier, its source clause in the AI in SDLC Control Framework, and what it means.

Reason code Kind Clause Meaning
no_low_class_matched informational §2.2 (fall-through) None of the deterministic Low classes (§2.2.3, §2.2.4, §2.2.7, docs-only) applied; classifier fell through to LLM evaluation.
prod_source_modified informational §2.1 M7 (informational) At least one file is non-doc, non-test, non-IaC — i.e. application source code was modified.
2.2.6_logical_extension — The diff contains only JSDoc comment expansions, inline documentation comments on existing methods, and test corrections (fixing a string value from 'identification' to 'identity_verification'), with no new endpoints, data classes, auth changes, or behavioral logic introduced. classifying §2.2.6 Sonnet 4.6 evaluator promoted minor → low: the change reuses existing code paths and does not cross a trust boundary.

Kinds:

  • classifying — this rule contributed to the chosen tier.
  • informational — context only; did not by itself decide the tier.

See issue #3 for the proposal to formalise this map as Appendix A of the standards doc.

wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · debug

@sonarqubecloud

sonarqubecloud Bot commented Oct 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@agent-wall-e agent-wall-e Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

✅ Auto-approved — this PR meets all Low-risk criteria.

All checks passed, no unresolved comments, and the change classification is:

  • no_low_class_matched
  • prod_source_modified
  • 2.2.6_logical_extension:The PR only adds JSDoc comments, inline documentation, and test coverage updates (correcting a purpose value string), with no new endpoints, data persistence, auth changes, external integrations, or behavioral logic changes.

wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · policy 6b4ce2b3b45a…

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant