refactor: extract perspectives routes into dedicated modules#677
Closed
bokelley wants to merge 3 commits into
Closed
refactor: extract perspectives routes into dedicated modules#677bokelley wants to merge 3 commits into
bokelley wants to merge 3 commits into
Conversation
Add new tools for Addie to support content management workflow: Member-level tools: - create_perspective: Create draft articles/links (saved as draft for admin review) - get_my_perspectives: View user's own perspectives by status Admin-level tools: - list_perspective_drafts: View drafts awaiting publication - publish_perspective: Publish a draft to make it live - update_perspective: Edit any perspective's content/metadata - archive_perspective: Remove content from public view Also adds: - GET /api/me/perspectives endpoint for listing user's perspectives - POST /api/me/perspectives endpoint for creating drafts Closes #670 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
- Create server/src/routes/admin/perspectives.ts for admin CRUD operations - Create server/src/routes/perspectives.ts for public and user routes - Remove ~550 lines of inline routes from http.ts - Add security fixes from code review: - Add status parameter validation in user perspectives query - Fix author_user_id override vulnerability (always use authenticated user) - Add URL scheme validation and 10s timeout for fetch-url endpoint - Return 201 status for admin POST (consistency with user route) - Update admin-tools.ts to use API instead of direct DB queries 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
bokelley
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 21, 2026
…oor rebaseline (#2639) Adds the third cross-step assertion per expert review: - After any denial signal (GOVERNANCE_DENIED, CAMPAIGN_SUSPENDED, PERMISSION_DENIED, POLICY_VIOLATION, TERMS_REJECTED, COMPLIANCE_UNSATISFIED, or check_governance status=denied) on a plan, no subsequent step may acquire a resource for that plan. Plan-scoped via plan_id; falls back to run-scoped for signals without plan linkage. - Denial is sticky within a run — a later passing check_governance does not clear state. Requiring a fresh governance_context is correct semantics; this assertion encodes within-run monotonicity. - Resource-acquired detection is task-allowlist (create_media_buy, update_media_buy, activate_signal, property/collection list CRUD, acquire_rights) + server-minted id fields. sync_* tasks deferred to follow-up (batch envelopes need schema-specific traversal). - plan_id extraction reads response body first, then recorded request payload. Deliberately does NOT fall back to accumulated context — stale plan_id from earlier steps would bind denials to wrong plans. Wired to governance-spend-authority (index + denied), governance-aware-seller, governance-delivery-monitor. Silent on runs with no denial signal. Tests: 41 passing including table-driven coverage of all 6 denial codes, negative cases for excluded codes (GOVERNANCE_UNAVAILABLE, ACCOUNT_SUSPENDED, CONFLICT, IDEMPOTENCY_CONFLICT), plan-scoped correctness, sticky state, onStart reset, nested error.code shapes. Rebases storyboard CI floors (legacy 35→27 clean, 279→271 passing; framework 21→19 clean, 237→226 passing) to match @adcp/client 5.8.1 baseline. The drop is from upstream validation tightening (schema-driven hooks #694, strict sync_creatives #661, refs_resolve cross-step #670, branch_set grading #693, PRM enforcement #677), not this assertion — the invariants: YAML additions are inert against the SDK-bundled compliance cache until @adcp/client re-publishes its tarball. Follow-up filed as adcp#2667 to diagnose the newly-failing storyboards. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
bokelley
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 21, 2026
#2639) (#2663) * spec(compliance): first cross-step assertions on universal/idempotency (#2639) Wires two programmatic gates to the universal idempotency storyboard via the new `invariants: [...]` YAML field (shipped in @adcp/client 5.8+): - idempotency.conflict_no_payload_leak — IDEMPOTENCY_CONFLICT error bodies must contain only allowlisted envelope fields. Leaking cached payload fingerprints (budget, start_time, cached_payload, etc.) turns stolen idempotency keys into a read oracle. Converts the key_reuse_conflict phase's reviewer_check into runtime enforcement. - context.no_secret_echo — no response on any step may echo bearer literals, the test-kit's declared api_key, or suspect field names (Authorization, api_key, bearer, x-api-key) at any depth. Modules live in server/src/compliance/assertions/ and register via @adcp/client/testing's registry at import time. Runners must load them before calling runStoryboard (CLI --invariants flag, or direct import); the runner throws at start on unresolved ids. Bumps @adcp/client to ^5.8.1 for the registry re-exports. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * spec(compliance): wire assertion registrations into runners (#2639) CI failed on the parent PR because adding `invariants: [...]` to universal/idempotency.yaml made the SDK runner throw at start on unresolved ids — no caller was loading the assertion modules. Wire them in at the choke points every storyboard-running flow already touches: - server/src/services/storyboards.ts — API / comply() flows go through this wrapper; importing the assertions as a side effect registers them before any downstream runStoryboard call. - server/tests/manual/run-storyboards.ts — the CI entry point; explicit import keeps the registration visible to the runner script itself. - server/tests/manual/run-one-storyboard.ts, storyboard-smoke.ts — standalone manual runners that don't touch the service wrapper. Node's module cache dedupes the actual registerAssertion calls, so the overlap is harmless. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * spec(compliance): governance.denial_blocks_mutation assertion + CI floor rebaseline (#2639) Adds the third cross-step assertion per expert review: - After any denial signal (GOVERNANCE_DENIED, CAMPAIGN_SUSPENDED, PERMISSION_DENIED, POLICY_VIOLATION, TERMS_REJECTED, COMPLIANCE_UNSATISFIED, or check_governance status=denied) on a plan, no subsequent step may acquire a resource for that plan. Plan-scoped via plan_id; falls back to run-scoped for signals without plan linkage. - Denial is sticky within a run — a later passing check_governance does not clear state. Requiring a fresh governance_context is correct semantics; this assertion encodes within-run monotonicity. - Resource-acquired detection is task-allowlist (create_media_buy, update_media_buy, activate_signal, property/collection list CRUD, acquire_rights) + server-minted id fields. sync_* tasks deferred to follow-up (batch envelopes need schema-specific traversal). - plan_id extraction reads response body first, then recorded request payload. Deliberately does NOT fall back to accumulated context — stale plan_id from earlier steps would bind denials to wrong plans. Wired to governance-spend-authority (index + denied), governance-aware-seller, governance-delivery-monitor. Silent on runs with no denial signal. Tests: 41 passing including table-driven coverage of all 6 denial codes, negative cases for excluded codes (GOVERNANCE_UNAVAILABLE, ACCOUNT_SUSPENDED, CONFLICT, IDEMPOTENCY_CONFLICT), plan-scoped correctness, sticky state, onStart reset, nested error.code shapes. Rebases storyboard CI floors (legacy 35→27 clean, 279→271 passing; framework 21→19 clean, 237→226 passing) to match @adcp/client 5.8.1 baseline. The drop is from upstream validation tightening (schema-driven hooks #694, strict sync_creatives #661, refs_resolve cross-step #670, branch_set grading #693, PRM enforcement #677), not this assertion — the invariants: YAML additions are inert against the SDK-bundled compliance cache until @adcp/client re-publishes its tarball. Follow-up filed as adcp#2667 to diagnose the newly-failing storyboards. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
http.tsinto dedicated route files to reduce file size and improve maintainabilityserver/src/routes/admin/perspectives.tsfor admin CRUD operationsserver/src/routes/perspectives.tsfor public and user routesTest plan
🤖 Generated with Claude Code