docs(spec): Update specification to use proto_to_table macro for all core operations#1242
Conversation
Summary of ChangesHello @iliesicatrinel, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request significantly improves the maintainability and accuracy of the project's specification documentation. By adopting the proto_to_table macro across all core operation descriptions, the PR automates the generation of input and output tables directly from protocol buffer definitions. This change ensures that the documentation remains synchronized with the evolving API, while also enhancing the macro to gracefully handle empty proto messages, making it a robust solution for future API expansions. Highlights
Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request is a great step towards improving the maintainability of the specification document. Replacing the manually crafted input/output lists with the proto_to_table macro will make it much easier to keep the documentation in sync with the protobuf definitions. The modification to the macro to handle empty messages is also a sensible change that allows for consistent usage across all operations.
The additional formatting fixes, like adding backticks for consistency and clarifying the structure of stream responses, further enhance the readability of the specification.
I have one minor suggestion to improve consistency even further. Overall, this is a solid and valuable change.
Co-authored-by: gemini-code-assist[bot] <176961590+gemini-code-assist[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
We should use the proto_to_table macro for describing inputs/outputs of operations to avoid having to modify the specification manually after protobuf definition changes.
Other changes:
Nonestring if proto is empty (e.g.GetExtendedAgentRequest). We should use macro for this request even if it's empty, because we may add fields (feat(spec): Natively Support Multi-tenancy on gRPC through an additional scope field on the request. #1195).Fixes #1243 🦕