fix: return mandatory fields from list_tasks#710
Conversation
Summary of ChangesHello @ishymko, 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 addresses a compliance issue with the A2A protocol specification by ensuring that all mandatory fields in the Highlights
Changelog
Activity
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
|
According to [the spec](https://a2a-protocol.org/latest/specification/#314-list-tasks) all response fields are mandatory. Update implementation and add tests to cover.
ad4bd78 to
35137fe
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request correctly updates the list_tasks implementation to return mandatory fields as per the specification, improving compliance and code clarity. The associated tests have also been updated. However, I've identified a regression where next_page_token is not handled correctly when it is None, which could lead to runtime errors. I've provided specific suggestions to address this. Overall, these are good changes.
According to the spec all response fields are mandatory. Update implementation and add tests to cover.
Re #515