Every failure in the management screens printed a guess. Deleting a working
copy said "it may be published, or something may reference it, or someone may
have edited it first" — three maybes, while the server had answered with
exactly one: "이 기록을 참조하는 곳이 있어 삭제할 수 없습니다". A version
conflict read as "in use" because the same sentence covered both, and an author
watching some deletions succeed and others fail had no way to tell them apart.
The gateway now carries the server's client-safe message and the screens show
it. The canned sentences remain only as a fallback for a failure that never
reached the server.
The topic status label said "사용 중" for every active topic, including one
created seconds earlier that nothing references. Next to a refusal about
records that use a topic, the two read as the same statement. It says "활성"
now, which is what the status means.
Publishing also stops demanding a finished document — the mock validator moves
with the real one, so what an author sees against fixtures matches production.
Task 3 리뷰 finding(Important): contract.ts의 손수 유지되는 ProblemDetails가
tech-log-studio-contract-contribution.ts의 envelopeError()가 실제로
반환하는 모양과 별도로 정의돼 있었다. envelopeError()는 ApiError의
type/title/status/detail/code/retryable/category/details만 채우므로
ProblemDetails가 갖고 있던 옛 평면 필드(instance/traceId/fieldErrors/
latestDocument/latestPublication/conflictingFields)는 production에서
항상 undefined였다 — mock만 채워서 mock이 아무것도 검증하지 못하는
상태였다.
- contract.ts: ProblemDetails에서 옛 평면 필드를 제거하고 details를
wire와 같은 union 타입(ValidationErrorDetails | VersionConflictDetails
| PublicationConflictDetails | null)으로 정확히 준다. 세 타입을 이제
개별 export한다.
- tech-log-studio-contract-contribution.ts: envelopeError()가
contract.ts의 ProblemDetails를 그대로 반환 타입으로 쓴다(로컬
StudioProblemShape 제거) — 이제 한 곳에만 정의가 있다.
- mock-studio-gateway.ts / cursor.ts: fieldErrors/latestDocument/
conflictingFields/latestPublication을 wire와 같은 자리(details 안)로
옮긴다.
- mock-studio-gateway.test.ts: 위 이동에 맞춰 details를 캐스트로 좁혀
읽도록 갱신.
retryable은 optional로 유지했다 — 여러 테스트가 생략하고 만들며, 이번
finding과 무관해 required로 좁히면 관련 없는 파일들이 깨진다.
리뷰가 보류한 2건(asset-upload-transport.ts의 CODES.has 중복 검사,
apiErrorSchema.category가 enum이 아닌 것)은 손대지 않았다.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
`idempotent()` was fixed to wrap anything `work()` throws, with a documented
rationale: this port's contract is `StudioGatewayError` only, so nothing else
may cross it. Its `read()` sibling was left unwrapped, so an uncharacterized
internal failure on any of the seven read operations escaped as a raw `Error`
and reached UI code written to catch `StudioGatewayError`.
`read()` now applies the same `failureOf` classification. It has no
idempotency ledger, so only the problem half is used. `boundary()` stays
outside the wrap so an aborted request still surfaces as `AbortError`,
exactly as `idempotent()` arranges it -- asserted by the new test.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Adds createHttpStudioGateway, the adapter the Studio UI calls in
production. It drives every mutation through mutationIntent()
(defineMutationIntent/defineIdempotencyKey, not
createBrowserMutationIntentFactory, so the caller-supplied idempotency
key is preserved rather than regenerated) and leaves header
construction to the executor/credential collaborator entirely - the
gateway never sees or sets Idempotency-Key or x-csrf-token itself.
Also moves stable-stringify.ts out of adapters/mock/ so the mock and
http adapters share one pure function without production code
depending on the mock directory, and fixes the resulting import in
cursor.ts, mock-studio-gateway.ts, and mock-studio-gateway.test.ts.
Adds MSW handlers (tests/mocks/handlers/tech-log-studio.ts) that wrap
the reference mock-studio-gateway implementation, and a contract test
suite that drives the gateway through a thin fetch-based executor
built from the contract's own projectRequest, proving canonical
path/body/header construction without assembling the full platform
transport.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Round 3 of the TechLog contract task added two pieces of genuinely new
logic with no assertion on their output: the totals.needsValidation
count in getDashboard(), and the detail() rewrite that avoids a
self-reference when computing WorkingCopyDetail.nextAction. Both would
have passed every existing test if they regressed.
- needsValidation is checked against an independent count derived from
listDocuments()'s per-document nextAction, with sanity bounds so a
filter that always returns 0 or the full count can't pass silently.
- detail()'s nextAction is asserted on two fixtures whose expected
value is justified by the asserted preconditions alongside it
(published-at-current-version -> NONE; INVALID-but-current-validation
-> FIX_VALIDATION). Verified locally that hardcoding nextAction to a
constant in detail() makes the second assertion fail, and that
zeroing needsValidation's count makes the dashboard assertion fail.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
DongHyeonka