Skip to content

RSDK-14587 Add get_pose to RobotClient - #1270

Open
JohnN193 wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
RSDK-14587-robot-client-get-pose
Open

JohnN193 wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
RSDK-14587-robot-client-get-pose

Conversation

@JohnN193

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Problem

RobotClient wraps three of the four frame system RPCs on robot.v1.RobotService (get_frame_system_config, transform_pose, transform_pcd) but not GetPose, even though GetPoseRequest and GetPoseResponse are already generated. The Go client forwards GetPose straight to the RPC. The Python FrameSystem service client (RSDK-14588) needs all four RPCs reachable, so this fills the gap first.

Change

  • RobotClient.get_pose(component_name, destination_frame="", supplemental_transforms=None, *, extra=None, timeout=None) -> PoseInFrame, placed between get_frame_system_config and transform_pose. An empty destination frame is passed through unchanged, since the server defaults it to world.
  • Docstring in the same style as transform_pose, since docs.viam.com is generated from these.
  • GetPose added to the mock robot service in tests/mocks/robot.py, matching its siblings.

Motion.get_pose on the motion service is untouched. This is the robot level equivalent.

Tests

tests/test_robot.py: a GetPose handler on the shared RobotService fixture, plus test_get_pose, which captures the requests and asserts that component name, destination frame, supplemental transforms and extra all reach the wire, and that an omitted destination frame goes out as an empty string.

make lint, pyright and make test pass (898 passed, 5 skipped).

Jira: RSDK-14587

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Wrap the robot service GetPose RPC next to the other frame system calls
so every frame system RPC is reachable from RobotClient. An empty
destination frame is passed through unchanged, since the server
defaults it to world.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@JohnN193
JohnN193 marked this pull request as ready for review September 22, 2026 17:07
@JohnN193
JohnN193 requested a review from a team as a code owner September 22, 2026 17:07

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant