Skip to content
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.

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

Potential Bug /Insight/RiskProfile Parameters #190

Open
jwyderko opened this issue Sep 16, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Potential Bug /Insight/RiskProfile Parameters #190

jwyderko opened this issue Sep 16, 2024 · 0 comments

Comments

@jwyderko
Copy link
Contributor

I think the casing for parameters to the risk_profile endpoint may be wrong:

https://github.com/CareEvolution/OrchestrateSDK/blob/main/python/orchestrate/_internal/insight.py#L74

where they are camel case

vs. snake_case in the Orchestrate docs

image

jeremytwfortune added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 16, 2024
## Description of Changes

This PR adjust the query string parameters passed to the
/insight/riskprofile endpoint to align with the casing in the
Orchestrate docs:

https://orchestrate.docs.careevolution.com/insight/risk_profile.html

Of note, I only updated the python code; I believe the Typescript
portion is already correct.

## Issue Link

This PR addresses the following issues:

#190 

## Security

**REMINDER: All file contents are public.**

- [x] I have ensured no secure credentials or sensitive information
remain in code, metadata, comments, etc. Of particular note: No
temporary testing changes committed such as API base URLs, access
tokens, print/log statements, etc.
- [x] My changes do not introduce any security risks, or any such risks
have been properly mitigated.

Describe briefly what security risks you considered, why they don't
apply, or how they've been mitigated.

This change is extemely minor, changing only the names of existing
parameters used to compose the URL. This change aligns the python SDK
with existing functionality in the typescript SDK.

## Reviewers

- [x] I have assigned the appropriate reviewer(s).

Minimally, a second set of eyes is needed ensure no non-public
information is published. Consider also including subject-matter experts
and editing/style reviewers.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant