feat:Unify operationId for GET and POST /v1/serp/{path} in OpenAPI #512
Conversation
WalkthroughUpdated the OpenAPI spec so both GET and POST /v1/serp/{path} operations now share the same operationId (serp_v1_serp__path__get). No other path, parameter, response, or security details were changed. Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes Poem
Tip 🔌 Remote MCP (Model Context Protocol) integration is now available!Pro plan users can now connect to remote MCP servers from the Integrations page. Connect with popular remote MCPs such as Notion and Linear to add more context to your reviews and chats. ✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests
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. 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
SupportNeed help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR/Issue comments)Type Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
coderabbitai
bot
changed the title
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
src/libs/Jina/openapi.yaml (1)
1-1: OpenAPI version “3.0.4” may be invalid for common toolingMost validators and generators recognize 3.0.0–3.0.3 or 3.1.0. Using 3.0.4 can cause tooling to reject the spec. Consider standardizing on 3.0.3 (or upgrade to 3.1.0 if needed).
Example adjustment:
-openapi: 3.0.4 +openapi: 3.0.3
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
💡 Knowledge Base configuration:
- MCP integration is disabled by default for public repositories
- Jira integration is disabled by default for public repositories
- Linear integration is disabled by default for public repositories
You can enable these sources in your CodeRabbit configuration.
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (4)
src/libs/Jina/Generated/Jina.Models.SerpV1SerpPathGetResponse.Json.g.csis excluded by!**/generated/**src/libs/Jina/Generated/Jina.Models.SerpV1SerpPathGetResponse.g.csis excluded by!**/generated/**src/libs/Jina/Generated/Jina.Models.SerpV1SerpPathGetResponse2.Json.g.csis excluded by!**/generated/**src/libs/Jina/Generated/Jina.Models.SerpV1SerpPathGetResponse2.g.csis excluded by!**/generated/**
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
src/libs/Jina/openapi.yaml(2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
src/libs/Jina/openapi.yaml (1)
306-306: GET: operationId now matches HTTP method — good consistencyAligning GET to
operationId: serp_v1_serp__path__getmatches the naming convention used elsewhere and removes the prior mismatch.
| - serp | ||
| summary: Serp | ||
| operationId: serp_v1_serp__path__post | ||
| operationId: serp_v1_serp__path__get |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Verification agent
🧩 Analysis chain
Duplicate operationId across GET and POST will break codegen and tooling
GET and POST for /v1/serp/{path} now share the same operationId (serp_v1_serp__path__get). OpenAPI requires operationId to be unique across all operations; duplicates commonly cause client/server generator collisions, overwritten methods, and validator failures.
Apply this minimal fix to restore uniqueness and keep parity with your existing naming scheme:
- operationId: serp_v1_serp__path__get
+ operationId: serp_v1_serp__path__postRun this script from the repo root to (1) detect duplicate operationIds and (2) verify whether any code references the POST operation’s original id:
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash
set -euo pipefail
SPEC="src/libs/Jina/openapi.yaml"
# 1) Check for duplicate operationIds
python - <<'PY'
import sys, yaml, collections
spec_path = "src/libs/Jina/openapi.yaml"
with open(spec_path, 'r', encoding='utf-8') as f:
spec = yaml.safe_load(f)
dups = collections.defaultdict(list)
paths = spec.get('paths', {})
for p, ops in paths.items():
if not isinstance(ops, dict):
continue
for method, op in ops.items():
if method.lower() not in ("get","post","put","patch","delete","options","head","trace"):
continue
op_id = (op or {}).get("operationId")
if op_id:
dups[op_id].append(f"{method.upper()} {p}")
dups = {k:v for k,v in dups.items() if len(v)>1}
if dups:
print("Duplicate operationIds found:")
for k,v in dups.items():
print(f" {k}:")
for where in v:
print(f" - {where}")
sys.exit(1)
print("No duplicate operationIds found.")
PY
# 2) (Optional) Scan the repo for references to a POST-specific id you may want to restore
rg -n -C2 -S '\bserp_v1_serp__path__post\b' || trueLength of output: 174
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash
set -euo pipefail
# Verify if any code references the new POST operationId
rg -n -C2 -S '\bserp_v1_serp__path__post\b' || echo "No references to the POST operationId found."Length of output: 164
Rename POST operationId to restore uniqueness
- Verified that both GET and POST for
/v1/serp/{path}use the same operationIdserp_v1_serp__path__get, causing a collision. - Confirmed via ripgrep that no code currently references a
serp_v1_serp__path__postidentifier. - To fix, update the POST operationId in
src/libs/Jina/openapi.yaml(around line 330):
- operationId: serp_v1_serp__path__get
+ operationId: serp_v1_serp__path__postThis change restores the required uniqueness and keeps your naming scheme consistent.
📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| operationId: serp_v1_serp__path__get | |
| operationId: serp_v1_serp__path__post |
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
In src/libs/Jina/openapi.yaml around line 330, the POST operation for
/v1/serp/{path} currently shares the GET operationId serp_v1_serp__path__get
causing a collision; update the POST operationId to a unique name (e.g.,
serp_v1_serp__path__post) following your naming scheme, ensure it is
syntactically valid YAML (keep same indentation) and run a quick ripgrep to
confirm no other references need adjustment.
Summary by CodeRabbit