fix(client): oauth.applications.register declares redirect_uris optional, matching the body schema of the route it posts to (#17215)

.changeset/17215-oauth-register-redirect-uris-optional.md

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+---
+"@objectstack/client": minor
+---
+
+fix(client): `oauth.applications.register` declares `redirect_uris` optional, matching the body schema of the route it posts to (#17215)
+
+`ObjectStackClient.oauth.applications.register` declared `redirect_uris` **required**. `POST /api/v1/auth/oauth2/create-client` is mounted verbatim from `@better-auth/oauth-provider`, and that route's body schema declares the member **optional** — so a request the route accepts had no spelling through this SDK. The caller never got a wrong answer; they got a call they could not write.
+
+## What changes for a caller
+
+Nothing they have to do. Every existing call still compiles — this only *adds* spellings:
+
+```ts
+// now expressible, and accepted by the route:
+await client.oauth.applications.register({ client_name: 'My App' });
+
+// unchanged, and still the right call when you have redirect URIs:
+await client.oauth.applications.register({
+  client_name: 'My App',
+  redirect_uris: ['https://app.example.com/cb'],
+});
+```
+
+⛔ Not breaking in this direction — relaxing a required member to optional keeps every existing call valid. Tightening it back later would be breaking, which is why the parity is now pinned.
+
+## Measured at runtime, not read off a `.d.ts`
+
+The vendor body schema was re-introspected the way the card's original measurement was taken: instantiate `oauthProvider()`, walk `endpoints`, find the endpoint whose `path` is `/oauth2/create-client`, read `options.body`. At the installed **1.7.3** (the card measured 1.7.2; the package has since moved) the object still declares **21 members and every one of them is optional**, and `body.safeParse({ client_name: '…' })` succeeds with `redirect_uris` absent.
+
+⚠️ Optional does **not** mean an empty array will do: the vendor refuses `[]`, so when the member is present it must be non-empty. Omitting it and passing `[]` are different requests and only the first is legal. Nor does it mean a client registered without redirect URIs is *usable* — it cannot complete an `authorization_code` flow. The type states what the route accepts, never that every accepted call yields a client fit for every grant; the docblock now says both.
+
+## Why it was required, for the record
+
+Not as a guard. It is residue from the method's first commit, which declared `client_name` required too; the same-day follow-up relaxed `client_name` and left this one behind. No comment, test, ADR or review thread ever asserted a reason for it — which is exactly why it read as a defect to the next auditor.
+
+Nothing else on the signature moves: the other ten members are byte-identical.

packages/client/src/index.ts

@@ -4090,11 +4090,32 @@ export class ObjectStackClient {
        * performs no such split — `redirect_uris` must arrive **pre-split**,
        * one entry per URL, which is what an SDK caller holds anyway.
        *
+       * ## ⚠️ `redirect_uris` is OPTIONAL here, and that is measured parity (#17215)
+       *
+       * It used to be the one required member on this type. It was never a
+       * deliberate guard — it is residue from the method's first commit, which
+       * declared `client_name` required too; the same-day follow-up relaxed
+       * `client_name` and left this one behind, and no comment, test, ADR or
+       * review thread ever asserted a reason for it.
+       *
+       * Re-introspected at runtime against `@better-auth/oauth-provider@1.7.3`
+       * — instantiate `oauthProvider()`, walk `endpoints`, read `options.body`
+       * — the member is `optional`, and a body omitting it entirely parses
+       * `ok`. All 21 members of that schema are optional.
+       *
+       * ⚠️ Optional does NOT mean `[]` will do. The vendor refuses an empty
+       * array, so when the member is present it must be non-empty: omitting it
+       * and passing `[]` are different requests, and only the first is legal.
+       * ⚠️ Nor does it mean a client registered without redirect URIs is
+       * usable — it cannot complete an `authorization_code` flow. This type
+       * states what the route accepts, never that every accepted call yields a
+       * client fit for every grant.
+       *
        * Pinned by `oauth-applications-register-request-members.test.ts`.
        */
       register: async (req: {
         client_name?: string;
-        redirect_uris: string[];
+        redirect_uris?: string[];
         token_endpoint_auth_method?: 'none' | 'client_secret_basic' | 'client_secret_post';
         grant_types?: string[];
         response_types?: string[];

packages/client/src/oauth-applications-register-request-members.test.ts

@@ -160,6 +160,55 @@ export async function registerRequestMemberPins15447(): Promise<void> {
   }));
 }
 
+// ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+// ①b [#17215] `redirect_uris` is OPTIONAL — parity with the vendor schema
+// ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+
+/**
+ * [#17215] The eleventh member was the one required member on this type, and
+ * the route it posts to declares it **optional**. Re-introspected at runtime
+ * against `@better-auth/oauth-provider@1.7.3` — instantiate `oauthProvider()`,
+ * walk `endpoints`, read `options.body` — every one of that schema's 21
+ * members is optional, and `body.safeParse({ client_name })` succeeds with
+ * `redirect_uris` absent. So a request the route accepts had no spelling here.
+ *
+ * ⚠️ This pin is type-level for the same reason `registerRequestMemberPins15447`
+ * is: the route answers the same way either way, and only a compile-time
+ * assertion can observe a member's OPTIONALITY changing. A runtime assertion
+ * on the request bytes cannot — `JSON.stringify` omits an absent member
+ * whether the type required it or not, so the body is byte-identical in both
+ * states and any such test is green before the fix and green after it.
+ *
+ * ⛔ The key-set equality above is deliberately NOT the guard for this:
+ * `keyof` is blind to optionality, so it reads the same eleven names in both
+ * states. That is why it keeps holding across this change, and why this needs
+ * its own assertion rather than relying on the one already there.
+ */
+export async function registerRedirectUrisOptionalPin17215(): Promise<void> {
+  // ── the parity assertion — red if anyone re-tightens it ──────────────
+  expectTypeOf<RegisterRequest['redirect_uris']>().toEqualTypeOf<string[] | undefined>();
+
+  // ── the call that was previously INEXPRESSIBLE ───────────────────────
+  // Before this card `redirect_uris` was required, so this did not compile at
+  // all. It is the whole point of the change: the vendor accepts this body.
+  void (await client.oauth.applications.register({ client_name: 'PROBE-17215-OMITTED' }));
+
+  // The emptiest legal call: every member of the vendor schema is optional.
+  void (await client.oauth.applications.register({}));
+
+  // ── and the call that always worked still does ───────────────────────
+  void (await client.oauth.applications.register({
+    client_name: 'CTRL-17215-SUPPLIED',
+    redirect_uris: ['https://app.example.com/cb'],
+  }));
+
+  // ⚠️ Optional is not "any array will do": the vendor refuses `[]`
+  // (`safeParse([])` fails at runtime). The TYPE cannot express non-empty, so
+  // this still compiles — recorded here so the next reader does not mistake
+  // the compiling call for a legal one.
+  void (await client.oauth.applications.register({ redirect_uris: [] }));
+}
+
 // ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
 // ② The negative control — what the route DOES honour still arrives verbatim
 // ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
@@ -211,6 +260,19 @@ describe('#15447 oauth.applications.register — the honoured members still reac
     expect(init.body).toBe(JSON.stringify(req));
   });
 
+  it('[#17215] a call omitting `redirect_uris` sends a body without the key at all', async () => {
+    // The type-level pin above cannot witness this half: it proves the call
+    // COMPILES, never what reaches the wire. This proves the SDK adds no
+    // default — no `redirect_uris: []` synthesised on the caller's behalf,
+    // which the vendor would refuse outright.
+    const { client: c, fetchMock } = clientCapturingRequest();
+    await c.oauth.applications.register({ client_name: 'PROBE-17215-OMITTED' });
+    const [url, init] = soleRequest(fetchMock);
+    expect(url).toBe(CREATE_CLIENT_URL);
+    expect(init.body).toBe(JSON.stringify({ client_name: 'PROBE-17215-OMITTED' }));
+    expect(JSON.parse(init.body as string)).not.toHaveProperty('redirect_uris');
+  });
+
   it("surfaces the route's refusal of an array-form `scope` rather than swallowing it", async () => {
     // ⚠️ The 400 below is a RECORDED response, replayed — never one this test
     // produces. It is the verbatim answer the driven run got (issue #15447,