During contract-seam scanning across CDH repos, I found a route-shape mismatch risk across TinyNode consumers:
deer uses /app/create, /app/query, /app/update, /app/overwrite
TPEN-services appears to use root routes /create, /query, /update, /overwrite, /delete
Recommended adjustment:
- Document canonical TinyNode API surface and supported aliases.
- Publish OpenAPI for TinyNode routes (including
/app/* and root aliases if both are supported).
- Add compatibility tests ensuring both consumer patterns continue to work, or explicitly deprecate one pattern with migration guidance.
Why this matters:
- Divergent route prefixes/method expectations increase break risk across consumers.
Filed by automation as requested; label: copilot.
During contract-seam scanning across CDH repos, I found a route-shape mismatch risk across TinyNode consumers:
deeruses/app/create,/app/query,/app/update,/app/overwriteTPEN-servicesappears to use root routes/create,/query,/update,/overwrite,/deleteRecommended adjustment:
/app/*and root aliases if both are supported).Why this matters:
Filed by automation as requested; label:
copilot.