Skip to content

add relay metadata fields for remote capability execution #1948

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
nadahalli merged 1 commit into from
Apr 1, 2026
Merged

add relay metadata fields for remote capability execution #1948

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
3 changes: 3 additions & 0 deletions pkg/capabilities/v2/actions/confidentialrelay/types.go
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -41,6 +41,9 @@ type SecretsResponseResult struct {
// CapabilityRequestParams is the JSON-RPC params for "confidential.capability.execute".
type CapabilityRequestParams struct {
WorkflowID string `json:"workflow_id"`
Owner string `json:"owner,omitempty"`
ExecutionID string `json:"execution_id,omitempty"`
ReferenceID string `json:"reference_id,omitempty"`
Comment on lines +44 to +46
Copy link

Copilot AI Mar 31, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

CapabilityRequestParams adds owner, execution_id, and reference_id but marks them omitempty. If these are part of the required wire contract for remote capability execution (as SecretsRequestParams already requires owner/execution_id), omitempty can silently drop them when empty, producing an invalid/ambiguous request and making it harder for the relay side to distinguish “missing” vs “present but empty”. Consider removing omitempty (and documenting expected formats like the secrets params), or switching to pointer types if the intent is to make presence/absence explicit.

Suggested change
Owner string `json:"owner,omitempty"`
ExecutionID string `json:"execution_id,omitempty"`
ReferenceID string `json:"reference_id,omitempty"`
Owner string `json:"owner"`
ExecutionID string `json:"execution_id"`
ReferenceID string `json:"reference_id"`

Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.
CapabilityID string `json:"capability_id"`
Payload string `json:"payload"`
Attestation string `json:"attestation,omitempty"`
Expand Down
Loading