thundercode commited on
Commit
c578b71
·
verified ·
1 Parent(s): 72833d9

docs: remove docs/API_CONTRACT.md (de-duplicated)

Browse files
Files changed (1) hide show
  1. docs/API_CONTRACT.md +0 -929
docs/API_CONTRACT.md DELETED
@@ -1,929 +0,0 @@
1
- # API Contract (ORIGINAL REFERENCE)
2
-
3
- > **STATUS: the project's authoritative API-contract reference**, preserved from the source repository
4
- > where the documentation-guard tests validate it. It is included here because those tests and several
5
- > documents refer to it by name.
6
- >
7
- > For the **release-facing** description of the same contract — including the shipped topology, the
8
- > gateway mirror, the error taxonomy and the entrypoint requirements — see
9
- > [architecture/08-api-contract.md](architecture/08-api-contract.md). Where the two differ in
10
- > emphasis, that chapter describes the shipped system.
11
-
12
- ---
13
-
14
- # SatQuery AI — Backend API Contract (v1)
15
-
16
- **Status:** SPECIFICATION — the backend implementation is described in
17
- `docs/DEPLOYMENT_ARCHITECTURE.md`; endpoints below are the contract the frontend
18
- MUST be built against.
19
-
20
- **Audience:** the frontend agent (Cloudflare Pages), and any other API consumer.
21
-
22
- **Authority:** the request/response **shapes** are not invented here. They are the
23
- existing, tested Pydantic models in `core/schemas.py`. This document describes
24
- them; it does not define new ones. Where a shape is described, the model name is
25
- given so it can be read directly in the source.
26
-
27
- ---
28
-
29
- ## 1. Conventions
30
-
31
- | Aspect | Value |
32
- |---|---|
33
- | Scheme | HTTPS only (the gateway redirects plain HTTP) |
34
- | Base path | `/v1/` |
35
- | Content types | Requests: `application/json` (or `multipart/form-data` for image upload). Responses: `application/json` |
36
- | Character encoding | UTF-8 |
37
- | Timestamps | ISO 8601 with `Z` offset, e.g. `2026-09-22T04:12:21.000Z` |
38
- | Field naming | `snake_case` throughout (matches the Pydantic models) |
39
- | Versioning | Path version (`/v1/`). A change that removes a field, changes a field's type or meaning, or adds a required field moves to `/v2/`. A purely additive field that existing clients can ignore does not bump the version — but see §1.1: because the server forbids unknown fields on **write**, adding an *input* field is a breaking change for old servers, not for old clients |
40
- | Schema version | Every response carries `schema_version`. Currently `"1.0"` (`core/schemas.py:21`) |
41
- | Machine-readable errors | Every error body carries a stable `code` string from the taxonomy in §5 |
42
-
43
- ### 1.1 Unknown fields are REJECTED, on read and on write
44
-
45
- **CORRECTED 2026-09-22 (C-2).** This section previously claimed that consumers
46
- "MUST tolerate unknown fields on read (forward compatibility)" and that only the
47
- write direction was strict. **That was wrong, and the code is authoritative.**
48
-
49
- `ResultEnvelope`, `HealthStatus`, `AnalysisRequest` and every other
50
- contract-facing model in `core/schemas.py` sets `extra="forbid"` — **with exactly
51
- one exception, `GeoMetadata`, which sets `extra="allow"`** (see below).
52
- Pydantic applies `forbid` symmetrically: an unknown field in a request body is a
53
- `422`, and an unknown field in a response body raised during `model_validate` is a
54
- `ValidationError`. A client that parses a response through these models does
55
- **not** get forward compatibility — it gets a hard failure the moment the server
56
- emits a field it has never heard of.
57
-
58
- > **The one exception, and why it is deliberate.** `GeoMetadata`
59
- > (`core/schemas.py:120`) sets `extra="allow"` and is the **only** model in the
60
- > codebase that does. It is the geospatial descriptor attached to
61
- > `AssetMetadata.geo` and `SpecialistResult.geospatial`, so it **is** reachable in
62
- > every `/v1/analyze` response. The reason is that a raster reader supplies
63
- > whatever tags the source file carries, and forbidding unknown keys there would
64
- > discard provenance a caller may need.
65
- >
66
- > **What this means for a client.** The strictness rule above holds for every
67
- > shape *except* the contents of a `geospatial`/`geo` object. A strict validator
68
- > will reject an unexpected top-level field, but must **not** reject an unexpected
69
- > key inside `geospatial` — the server may legitimately add one without a version
70
- > bump. Treat that sub-object as the single open surface in the contract.
71
- >
72
- > This exception was recorded in `docs/STEP7_BACKEND_CHAIN_REPORT.md` but had
73
- > never reached this document, which is the one a client author reads. Recorded
74
- > here by the STEP 8 audit as finding C-8.
75
-
76
- The consequences, stated plainly because they are easy to get wrong:
77
-
78
- - **Additive changes are not free.** Adding a field to a response breaks any
79
- client that validates strictly. This is why §2.1's `modalities` field could
80
- not simply be dropped into the capability entry without recording it here.
81
- - **A version bump is required** when a field is added, not only when one is
82
- removed. The old row in the table above said the opposite; the corrected row
83
- says what the code does.
84
- - **Clients should be written permissively even though the server is strict.**
85
- That is a client-side robustness measure, not a server guarantee, and the
86
- server must not be documented as if it provided one.
87
-
88
- The direction of this correction matters: the *documentation* was the wrong
89
- half, so the documentation was fixed and `extra="forbid"` was left alone.
90
- Loosening the schema to match the prose would have replaced a clear failure with
91
- a silently-ignored field, which is worse for a machine-readable contract.
92
-
93
- ---
94
-
95
- ## 2. Endpoints
96
-
97
- The surface is **four** endpoints. The plan fixed three; the owner ruling of
98
- 2026-09-22 added the fourth by choosing Option A for upload (§2.5).
99
-
100
- | Method | Path | Purpose | Auth |
101
- |---|---|---|---|
102
- | `GET` | `/v1/health` | Liveness + which models are loaded | none |
103
- | `GET` | `/v1/capabilities` | What this deployment can actually do right now | none |
104
- | `POST` | `/v1/analyze` | Run one analysis request | none (see §7) |
105
- | `POST` | `/v1/assets` | Upload one image out of band; returns an opaque handle | none (see §7, §2.5) |
106
-
107
- ---
108
-
109
- ### 2.1 `GET /v1/health`
110
-
111
- Liveness probe. Cheap. **Must not** load a model, must not touch the GPU.
112
-
113
- **Response `200`** — shape is `HealthStatus` (`core/schemas.py:392`). This is the
114
- measured output of a deployment where the CROMA checkpoint is not shipped:
115
-
116
- ```json
117
- {
118
- "status": "degraded",
119
- "schema_version": "1.0",
120
- "models": {
121
- "caption": "not_requested",
122
- "change": "not_requested",
123
- "change_vqa": "not_requested",
124
- "grounding": "not_requested",
125
- "optical_sar": "absent",
126
- "vqa": "not_requested"
127
- },
128
- "device": "cpu",
129
- "gpu_available": false
130
- }
131
- ```
132
-
133
- **Every capability the registry resolves appears in `models`**, and the set is
134
- identical to `capabilities[].task` in §2.2 — the two endpoints are generated
135
- from one source, so they cannot enumerate different capabilities. A key is never
136
- absent; a capability that cannot be served is reported with a state, not by
137
- omission.
138
-
139
- | Field | Type | Notes |
140
- |---|---|---|
141
- | `status` | `"ok" \| "degraded" \| "error"` | `degraded` = the service is up but at least one capability is not servable. **Derived, not asserted**: any `absent` capability makes the service `degraded`; any `unavailable` makes it `error` |
142
- | `schema_version` | `string` | Always present |
143
- | `models` | `object<string,string>` | Per-capability state. Values are **strings, not booleans**, so a reason can be carried. See §2.3 for the vocabulary |
144
- | `device` | `string \| null` | `"cpu"`, `"cuda"`, `"mps"`, or `null` if unknown |
145
- | `gpu_available` | `boolean` | Whether a CUDA/MPS device was detected. `false` is normal on ZeroGPU Spaces until a request is executing |
146
-
147
- > **`device` is a closed set, and `null` means the value was not understood.**
148
- > **F-8, corrected here (2026-09-22).** This row has always published four
149
- > legal values, but the reader accepted **any** string and echoed it into the
150
- > field, so `SATQUERY_DEVICE=garbage` served `{"device": "garbage"}` — a value
151
- > the frontend has no rendering for. The reader now casefolds and validates
152
- > against the set above; anything unrecognised is served as `null`.
153
- > `null` is deliberately **not** a silent `"cpu"`: reporting the CPU because the
154
- > operator mistyped would be a false statement about the deployment, and it is
155
- > the same mistake that F-7 fixed in a different variable.
156
- > The case of the operator's input is also no longer significant: before this
157
- > fix `SATQUERY_DEVICE=CUDA` resolved differently from `SATQUERY_DEVICE=cuda`,
158
- > which let one payload claim `gpu_available: true` alongside `device: "CUDA"`.
159
- >
160
- > **Invariant the frontend may rely on:** if `device == "cuda"` then
161
- > `gpu_available` is `true`. The converse does **not** hold — a GPU may exist
162
- > while `device` is `"cpu"` (the operator chose it, or the config did).
163
-
164
- **Important for the frontend:** `gpu_available: false` on a ZeroGPU Space is
165
- **expected**, not an error. ZeroGPU allocates the GPU only for the duration of a
166
- decorated call. Do not surface this as a fault.
167
-
168
- This endpoint is answered **without loading any model and without importing
169
- torch** — the device is resolved from configuration, not by probing the runtime.
170
- A liveness probe that built the world would consume GPU quota to say "I am
171
- alive".
172
-
173
- ---
174
-
175
- ### 2.2 `GET /v1/capabilities`
176
-
177
- What the deployment can do **right now**, derived from actual artifact presence —
178
- not from what the code could theoretically do.
179
-
180
- **Every capability the registry resolves is listed**, including ones this
181
- deployment cannot serve. A capability that cannot be served is reported
182
- `available: false` with a reason, never omitted: omitting it would make it
183
- invisible to the frontend, which cannot disable an affordance it was never told
184
- about.
185
-
186
- **Response `200`** — this is the measured output of a deployment where four of
187
- the six capabilities lack their runtime dependencies and `optical_sar` lacks its
188
- CROMA checkpoint:
189
-
190
- ```json
191
- {
192
- "schema_version": "1.0",
193
- "capabilities": [
194
- {
195
- "task": "change",
196
- "available": true,
197
- "reason": null,
198
- "requires_pair": true,
199
- "max_assets": 2
200
- },
201
- {
202
- "task": "change_vqa",
203
- "available": true,
204
- "reason": null,
205
- "requires_pair": true,
206
- "max_assets": 2
207
- },
208
- {
209
- "task": "optical_sar",
210
- "available": false,
211
- "reason": "the CROMA backbone checkpoint (CROMA_base.pt) is not present in this deployment; without it optical/SAR fusion degrades to sensor-only; the trained optical/SAR fusion head is not present in this deployment; without it no fused prediction is produced",
212
- "requires_pair": true,
213
- "max_assets": 2,
214
- "modalities": ["optical", "sar"]
215
- },
216
- {
217
- "task": "caption",
218
- "available": true,
219
- "reason": "the SmolVLM weights are fetched from the Hugging Face Hub on first use and no local checkpoint_path is configured in this deployment",
220
- "requires_pair": false,
221
- "max_assets": 1
222
- }
223
- ],
224
- "deployment": {
225
- "platform": "huggingface-spaces",
226
- "zerogpu": true,
227
- "lazy_load": true,
228
- "cache_max_models": 1,
229
- "torch_compile": false
230
- }
231
- }
232
- ```
233
-
234
- *(Abridged: the real response lists all six. `grounding` and `vqa` are omitted
235
- here only to keep the example readable. The two reasons shown are verbatim --
236
- note that `optical_sar`'s names **two** missing artifacts, because two are
237
- required and both are absent.)*
238
-
239
- | Field | Type | Notes |
240
- |---|---|---|
241
- | `capabilities[].task` | `string` | One of the `Task` enum values (§3.1) |
242
- | `capabilities[].available` | `boolean` | Whether the task can be served on this deployment **right now** |
243
- | `capabilities[].reason` | `string \| null` | **Required when `available` is `false`.** A bare `false` with no reason is not compliant |
244
- | `capabilities[].modalities` | `string[]` | **Optional; present only for `optical_sar`.** Valid pairings for a modality-sensitive task |
245
- | `capabilities[].requires_pair` | `boolean` | Whether two assets are required |
246
- | `capabilities[].max_assets` | `integer` | Maximum assets accepted |
247
- | `deployment.platform` | `string` | Deployment target, e.g. `"huggingface-spaces"` |
248
- | `deployment.zerogpu` | `boolean` | Whether GPU work runs under ZeroGPU's per-call allocation |
249
- | `deployment.lazy_load` | `boolean` | `true` means models load on first use; this is what makes `not_requested` the normal state (§2.3.1) |
250
- | `deployment.cache_max_models` | `integer` | Resident-model cap. `1` means requests serialize — see the obligation below |
251
- | `deployment.torch_compile` | `boolean` | Always `false`. `torch.compile` is unsupported on ZeroGPU and the config loader hard-fails on `true` (finding C-8). Echoed here so an operator can confirm the constraint from a single response |
252
-
253
- **A `reason` on an *available* capability is not a defect.** Three capabilities
254
- above are `available: true` and still carry a reason — it reads
255
- *"…fetched from the Hub on first use, no local checkpoint configured"*. That is
256
- not an error; it is a disclosure that the first request will be slow and will
257
- need egress. A frontend that treats a non-null `reason` as a failure will
258
- mislay every cold start.
259
-
260
- **Contract obligations:**
261
- - The frontend **MUST** build its UI affordances from this response, not from a
262
- hardcoded list. A capability that is `available: false` must be shown as
263
- disabled **with its `reason` displayed** — never hidden, never silently
264
- downgraded to a different task.
265
- - The deployment block echoes `configs/deploy.yaml`. Note `cache_max_models: 1`:
266
- at most one model is resident. Concurrent requests for different specialists
267
- will evict each other, so **the frontend must not assume parallel throughput**.
268
-
269
- ---
270
-
271
- ### 2.3 Capability state vocabulary
272
-
273
- Used in `GET /v1/health` → `models`, and consistent with `capabilities`.
274
-
275
- **These five words are the complete permitted vocabulary.** They are the
276
- contract's vocabulary and are **not** the registry's — see §2.3.1.
277
-
278
- | Value | Meaning |
279
- |---|---|
280
- | `"loaded"` | Resident and ready |
281
- | `"absent"` | The artifact is not present in this deployment. Permanent for this revision; not retryable |
282
- | `"unavailable"` | Present but could not be loaded (corrupt, incompatible, dependency missing). **This is a defect**, distinct from `absent` |
283
- | `"not_requested"` | Nothing has attempted to load it yet (normal with `lazy_load: true`) |
284
- | `"evicted"` | Was loaded, was unloaded to make room (`cache_max_models: 1`) |
285
-
286
- `absent` and `unavailable` **must not be conflated** in the UI. Absent means "this
287
- build does not ship it"; unavailable means "this build ships it and it is broken".
288
-
289
- ---
290
-
291
- #### 2.3.1 Why there is a translation layer, and what it must never leak
292
-
293
- **Added 2026-09-22 by owner ruling.** This is the section that explains the
294
- otherwise-odd fact that the system has *two* capability vocabularies.
295
-
296
- The registry — the component that resolves specialists — speaks a different
297
- language from this contract.
298
-
299
- **The adapter derives the contract state; it does not read a live registry
300
- state.** This is the one fact about the layer that is easy to get backwards, so
301
- it is stated first. `app/deployment.py` inspects the registry's declared **spec
302
- table** and the **filesystem** and derives the contract state from what it
303
- finds. It never calls `build()`/`build_all()`, because requirement 4
304
- (`DEPLOYMENT_ARCHITECTURE.md` §3.3) forbids loading a model to answer a metadata
305
- request. A live registry state is therefore *not observable* on this path, and
306
- the registry's word is reconstructed from the contract state — not translated
307
- into it.
308
-
309
- That inversion has one visible consequence: **`loaded` is never emitted, and
310
- neither is `degraded`.** A capability whose artifacts are all present and which
311
- has not yet been asked for is reported `not_requested`, not `loaded`, because
312
- "a model is resident" is a claim no process can honestly make without having
313
- loaded it. The following table is exhaustive — it lists every state the adapter
314
- can produce:
315
-
316
- | Contract state | When it is emitted | `available` | Why |
317
- |---|---|---|---|
318
- | `not_requested` | All declared shipped artifacts are present, and nothing has attempted a load. **The normal healthy state under `lazy_load: true`** | `true` | Nothing is missing. Emitting `loaded` here would claim a model was resident, which cannot be known without loading one (requirement 4) |
319
- | `absent` | A required shipped artifact is not on disk in this deployment | `false` | Nothing is broken; the deployment does not ship it. The reason names the specific artifact |
320
- | `unavailable` | Construction was attempted in this process and failed (defect path only) | `false` | Present but broken — a genuine defect, which the contract keeps distinct from `absent` |
321
- | `evicted` | *(never emitted)* | — | A runtime model-cache fact. No static inspection can observe it, so the server never claims it |
322
- | `loaded` | *(never emitted)* | — | See above. Note the vocabulary is closed, so a client must still be prepared to read it if a future revision emits it |
323
-
324
- > **`available: true` and `models: "not_requested"` coexist by design, and that
325
- > is not a contradiction.** The two fields answer different questions:
326
- > `available` is "can this deployment serve this capability?" and `not_requested`
327
- > is "has anything loaded it yet?". Under `lazy_load: true` the healthy answer to
328
- > the second is *no, not yet* — for every capability, including ones that will
329
- > work perfectly on the first request. A frontend that treats `not_requested` as
330
- > a fault will mislabel a fully working deployment.
331
-
332
- Two consequences the frontend must internalise:
333
-
334
- 1. **`unavailable` means the opposite thing on each side of the layer.** To the
335
- registry it is "no builder could be constructed" — a benign state that
336
- includes simply not having the artifact. To this contract it is "present but
337
- broken, therefore a defect". The same spelling, opposite severity. This is
338
- precisely why the layer exists, and why the table above is the only
339
- definition a client may rely on. Note the important corollary: the benign
340
- registry meaning *does not* surface as `unavailable` here — a missing
341
- artifact surfaces as `absent`, which is a different word and a different
342
- remedy.
343
- 2. **A capability is never omitted for being unservable.** It is reported
344
- `available: false` with a reason. The registry resolves six capabilities
345
- regardless of what this host can run.
346
-
347
- The registry's own vocabulary is **internal** and is never served on any
348
- endpoint. `/v1/health` and `/v1/capabilities` are the only sources a client
349
- needs, and both are generated from the contract vocabulary above.
350
-
351
- ---
352
-
353
- ### 2.4 `POST /v1/analyze`
354
-
355
- Run one analysis. This is the only endpoint that can consume GPU quota.
356
-
357
- #### Request (JSON)
358
-
359
- Shape is `AnalysisRequest` (`core/schemas.py:374`). `extra="forbid"`.
360
-
361
- ```json
362
- {
363
- "assets": ["asset_0", "asset_1"],
364
- "query": "How has the built-up area changed between these two dates?",
365
- "force_task": "change_vqa",
366
- "run_id": "9f2c1c0e-4a5b-4f5e-9a2c-1b3d4e5f6a7b"
367
- }
368
- ```
369
-
370
- | Field | Type | Required | Notes |
371
- |---|---|---|---|
372
- | `assets` | `string[]` | **yes** | Minimum length 1. Values are **asset handles returned by the upload step** (§2.5), not base64 and not URLs |
373
- | `query` | `string` | **yes** | Natural language. Empty string is permitted by the schema but will route to an `unsupported_query` error in practice |
374
- | `force_task` | `string \| null` | no | One of the `Task` values (§3.1). Bypasses the intent router |
375
- | `run_id` | `string \| null` | no | Client-supplied correlation id. If omitted the server generates one. **The server always echoes a `run_id` in the response**, so the client should record whichever value comes back |
376
-
377
- #### Request (`multipart/form-data`) — the upload path
378
-
379
- When images are uploaded directly, use:
380
-
381
- ```
382
- POST /v1/analyze
383
- Content-Type: multipart/form-data
384
- ```
385
-
386
- | Part | Type | Notes |
387
- |---|---|---|
388
- | `assets` | file, repeatable | 1–2 image files. Field name repeats for the pair |
389
- | `request` | text | A JSON string of the `AnalysisRequest` body with `assets` omitted |
390
-
391
- > **Not yet implemented.** The multipart entry point is part of the gateway's
392
- > contract but the reference implementation serves the JSON form only. See
393
- > §8 for the status boundary. Build the frontend against the JSON form, which
394
- > pairs with `POST /v1/assets`.
395
-
396
- ---
397
-
398
- ### 2.5 `POST /v1/assets` — **IMPLEMENTED** (Option A)
399
-
400
- > **Superseded decision record.** The paragraphs below originally recorded this
401
- > endpoint as an unresolved gap with two options. The owner ruling of
402
- > 2026-09-22 chose **Option A** (out-of-band upload with opaque ephemeral
403
- > handles). The endpoint is built and is part of the served surface. The
404
- > original reasoning is retained verbatim underneath, because the reason the
405
- > fourth endpoint exists at all is the argument in it.
406
-
407
- `AnalyzeRequest.assets` is `list[str]` — asset *handles*, not bytes — and the
408
- plan defines no upload endpoint. Those two facts cannot both hold without a
409
- fourth endpoint, so there is one.
410
-
411
- **Request.** `multipart/form-data` with exactly one part, the file. The
412
- `Content-Type` of the part is the declared type.
413
-
414
- **Response `201`.**
415
-
416
- ```json
417
- {
418
- "asset_id": "asset_7c6f64a4a4c821e25d518467a1cc5d47",
419
- "content_type": "image/png",
420
- "bytes": 20481,
421
- "expires_at": "2026-09-22T04:42:21.000Z"
422
- }
423
- ```
424
-
425
- Three guarantees the frontend depends on, and the shape of each:
426
-
427
- | Concern | Guarantee |
428
- |---|---|
429
- | **Opacity** | `asset_id` is `asset_` + 32 hex characters, from `secrets.token_hex(16)`. It is **128 bits of entropy and carries no information about the upload** — no filename, no type, no index, no position. There is no auth in v1 (§7), so this handle **is** the access control for the uploaded bytes |
430
- | **Size limit** | A per-file byte cap, configurable per deployment (see §2.5.1). **It is enforced at two layers and a client should rely on both.** The *gateway* refuses an over-limit body from a declared `Content-Length` **and**, since the F-6 fix, while reading the bytes — so omitting the header does not evade it (`gateway/app.py::_read_body_bounded`). The *Space* does the same: since the F-9 fix it refuses while reading via the shared `gateway/assets.py::read_body_bounded`, rather than buffering the body and leaving the cap to `store.put()`. **Both layers therefore refuse an over-limit body without holding it in full, and either one alone is sufficient** — a client that reaches the Space directly is covered, not only one that goes through the gateway. An over-limit upload gets `413` and **writes nothing** |
431
-
432
- > **F-6, corrected here (2026-09-22).** This row previously read *"enforced on the
433
- > received bytes — not on a declared `Content-Length`"*. That described the store
434
- > correctly and the **gateway incorrectly**: at the gateway the cap was applied
435
- > *only* to the header, because `policy.admit` runs before the body is read and
436
- > the header is the only evidence it has. Measured through the real ASGI stack
437
- > with the cap at 8 MiB and a 12 MiB body: a declared `Content-Length` drew `413`
438
- > (peak 0.2 MiB, 0 bytes read) but an **omitted** one drew `502` with a peak of
439
- > **13.9 MiB** — the whole body buffered past the cap. Allocation then tracked
440
- > body size exactly with no ceiling (1/8/16/32/64 MiB in → 3.0/8.1/16.0/32.0/64.0
441
- > MiB allocated). The gateway now enforces the cap while reading, and pinning
442
- > tests assert both the refusal and that the boundary is still inclusive at
443
- > exactly the cap.
444
-
445
- > **F-7, corrected here (2026-09-22).** The cap is set by **one** variable,
446
- > `SATQUERY_MAX_FILE_BYTES`, read by **both** layers — and until this fix each
447
- > layer **parsed it separately**, so "one variable" did not mean "one value".
448
- > Measured on four inputs (probe `probe_f7_cap_parsers.py`): `'abc'` and `'4e6'`
449
- > made the gateway **raise at startup** while the Space **silently returned the
450
- > 4 MiB default**; `'0'` and `'-1'` were **accepted** by the gateway while the
451
- > Space rejected them only when the first upload arrived. Neither layer was right
452
- > in both directions. Both now refuse an unparsable **or non-positive** value,
453
- > naming the variable, and a cross-layer agreement test drives the whole matrix
454
- > through both real parsers. A deployment whose cap is malformed no longer starts
455
- > at all, at either layer, instead of quietly running on a limit nobody chose.
456
- | **Content-type allowlist** | A **closed list of exactly five types**: `image/tiff` · `image/geotiff` · `image/png` · `image/jpeg` · `application/octet-stream`. A request with **no** declared type is **refused rather than defaulted** — defaulting is how a PDF reaches a raster reader. A disallowed type gets `415`. Media-type parameters are ignored, so `image/tiff; charset=binary` is accepted (`gateway/assets.py::_normalise_content_type`). **`image/tiff` is the type the geospatial specialists need** — a client that uploads only PNG/JPEG can serve the VQA, caption and grounding tasks but not the change or optical/SAR ones |
457
- | **Retries** | There is **no idempotency key**. A retry is a **new** upload that mints a **new** handle; the previous handle is not reused and is not revoked, it simply lapses on its TTL. A client that retries must therefore use the *latest* handle, and should expect the abandoned one to occupy a slot until it expires |
458
-
459
- **Errors.** `413` over the size limit · `415` unsupported or absent content
460
- type · `503` the asset store is not configured on this deployment · `400` for a
461
- malformed body. All use the §5 envelope.
462
-
463
- **Lifetime.** Handles expire on a TTL and are **refused on read** once lapsed —
464
- a lapsed handle is rejected even if nothing has swept it, so a client never
465
- succeeds by racing a cleanup job. Capacity is bounded, and **a live handle is
466
- never evicted to make room**: when the store is full it refuses (`503`) rather
467
- than invalidating a handle a client is about to use. A handle is single-use in
468
- practice — consuming it in `/v1/analyze` does not consume it, so the same handle
469
- may be analysed repeatedly until it expires.
470
-
471
- **What `asset_id` is not.** It is not a path, and the response never discloses
472
- one. The stored filename is derived from the **content type**, never from the
473
- client's filename, so a client-supplied `../../` cannot influence where bytes
474
- land.
475
-
476
- ---
477
-
478
- #### 2.5.1 Original decision record (retained)
479
-
480
- The gap this section originally recorded was stated as **"NOT IN THE PLAN"**: the
481
- plan fixes the surface at three endpoints, none of which accepts a file, yet
482
- `AnalyzeRequest.assets` is `list[str]` of handles. Both cannot be true without a
483
- fourth endpoint. The phrase is preserved here because it is the finding, and a
484
- decision record that deletes the problem it solved is not a record.
485
-
486
- | Option | Shape | Trade-off |
487
- |---|---|---|
488
- | **A. Out-of-band upload** — **CHOSEN** | `POST /v1/assets` → `{"asset_id": "...", "expires_at": "..."}`. Frontend uploads first, then calls `/v1/analyze` with the returned ids | Keeps `/v1/analyze` JSON-only and lets the gateway enforce a size limit *before* the JSON body is parsed. Costs one extra round trip |
489
- | **B. Inline multipart** — not chosen | `/v1/analyze` accepts `multipart/form-data` directly (§2.4) | One round trip. Couples upload and analysis; a retry re-uploads |
490
-
491
- The three things the frontend needs — *a per-file size limit, a content-type
492
- allowlist, and an idempotency story for retries* — are specified in the table
493
- above. Note that "idempotency story" resolved to "there is none, a retry mints a
494
- new handle", which is a decision rather than an omission: with no request key in
495
- the contract, a deduplicating server would have to hash payloads, and a
496
- content-hash handle is exactly the guessable identifier §2.5 forbids.
497
-
498
- ---
499
-
500
- #### Response `200`
501
-
502
- Shape is `ResultEnvelope` (`core/schemas.py:383`).
503
-
504
- ```json
505
- {
506
- "run_id": "9f2c1c0e-4a5b-4f5e-9a2c-1b3d4e5f6a7b",
507
- "schema_version": "1.0",
508
- "result": {
509
- "task": "change_vqa",
510
- "answer": "The built-up area increased...",
511
- "labels": [],
512
- "regions": [],
513
- "boxes": [
514
- {
515
- "x1": 0.12, "y1": 0.34, "x2": 0.56, "y2": 0.78,
516
- "label": "expanded built-up area",
517
- "score": 0.81,
518
- "coordinate_system": "normalized_0_1"
519
- }
520
- ],
521
- "masks": [],
522
- "change_map": null,
523
- "evidence": [
524
- {
525
- "evidence_id": "ev_001",
526
- "type": "change_map",
527
- "score": 0.72,
528
- "source_specialist": "change_vqa",
529
- "coordinate_system": "normalized_0_1",
530
- "coordinates": [0.12, 0.34, 0.56, 0.78],
531
- "artifact_ref": null,
532
- "payload": {}
533
- }
534
- ],
535
- "confidence": {
536
- "raw": 0.991,
537
- "calibrated": 0.987,
538
- "method": "temperature_scaling",
539
- "components": {},
540
- "degraded": false,
541
- "degradation_reason": null
542
- },
543
- "geospatial": {},
544
- "execution_trace": null,
545
- "schema_version": "1.0",
546
- "warnings": [],
547
- "degraded": false
548
- },
549
- "trace": {
550
- "run_id": "9f2c1c0e-4a5b-4f5e-9a2c-1b3d4e5f6a7b",
551
- "task": "change_vqa",
552
- "intent": null,
553
- "query": "How has the built-up area changed?",
554
- "modalities": ["optical"],
555
- "workflow": [],
556
- "steps": [],
557
- "timings": {},
558
- "selected_models": [],
559
- "parameters": {},
560
- "config_hash": "78f1e3700da15aa1",
561
- "inputs": [],
562
- "outputs": [],
563
- "errors": [],
564
- "fallbacks": [],
565
- "contradiction": false,
566
- "validation": {},
567
- "confidence": null,
568
- "started_at": "2026-09-22T04:12:21.000Z",
569
- "finished_at": "2026-09-22T04:12:29.400Z",
570
- "schema_version": "1.0"
571
- }
572
- }
573
- ```
574
-
575
- > `trace` above lists every field `ExecutionTrace` defines. Fields left `null` or
576
- > empty here are genuinely optional, not omitted from the contract — the model
577
- > uses defaults, so they will normally be **present** in a real response. The
578
- > frontend should read only the ones it needs and tolerate the rest.
579
-
580
- #### The fields the frontend must read correctly
581
-
582
- | Field | Why it matters |
583
- |---|---|
584
- | `result.confidence.value` | **NOT a JSON field.** It is a Python `@property` on `ConfidenceBreakdown` and is **not serialised** (verified: `model_dump()` yields only `calibrated, components, degradation_reason, degraded, method, raw`). To get the number the user should see, read `calibrated` if it is non-null, otherwise `raw` |
585
- | `result.confidence.method` | `"uncalibrated"` or `"temperature_scaling"`. See §4 |
586
- | `result.confidence.degraded` / `degradation_reason` | Whether the confidence is trustworthy. **Display the reason verbatim when set** |
587
- | `result.degraded` + `result.warnings` | The result is served but something was degraded. Warnings are for the operator, not the end user |
588
- | `result.answer` | `""` for non-VQA tasks. Empty is valid |
589
- | `result.boxes[].coordinate_system` | **Read this per box.** See §3.2 |
590
- | `result.boxes[]` flat geometry | `x1, y1, x2, y2` are **flat fields on the box**, not a nested `box` object. `Region` is the one with a nested `box` |
591
- | `result.evidence[]` shape | Every evidence item carries: `evidence_id` (unique within a result), `type`, `score`, `source_specialist`, `coordinate_system`, `coordinates`, `artifact_ref`, `payload`. Note `score` — not `value` — and `source_specialist` — not `source`. **`artifact_ref` is always `null` in v1** — see "Artifact refs — `null` in v1, and why" above |
592
- | `result.evidence[].type` | One of 11 `EvidenceType` values: `image_crop`, `tile`, `bounding_box`, `mask`, `change_map`, `optical_view`, `sar_view`, `joint_feature_region`, `statistic`, `geolocation`, `availability_mask` |
593
- | `trace.steps[].state` | `ControllerState` — the pipeline stage. `detail` and `duration_ms` accompany it |
594
- | `trace.steps` | Observable facts only. **Never chain-of-thought** (plan section 26). Safe to display |
595
- | `trace.config_hash` | The frozen config identity. `78f1e3700da15aa1` for this revision |
596
-
597
- #### Artifact refs — `null` in v1, and why
598
-
599
- **Every `artifact_ref` and `change_map` in a v1 response is `null`.** This is a
600
- deliberate contract, not a missing value.
601
-
602
- F-16 (owner ruling 2026-09-23): **never expose filesystem paths.** The
603
- specialists *do* render their artifacts — the change map and the optical/SAR
604
- views are written server-side — but their location is an operator fact, not a
605
- client-facing one. A response that carried the server's path would disclose the
606
- deployment's directory layout to an unauthenticated caller, and nothing the
607
- frontend can do requires it.
608
-
609
- **No `artifact://` URI is fabricated in its place.** v1 has **no
610
- artifact-serving endpoint**, so a URI would be a promise the service cannot
611
- keep — strictly worse than `null`, because the frontend would build a link that
612
- 404s. The earlier revision of this document showed
613
- `"artifact_ref": "artifact://run/9f2c.../change_map.png"`; no production file
614
- ever emitted one, which is exactly how the divergence survived. The example
615
- above now shows the ruled shape.
616
-
617
- What replaces the ref:
618
-
619
- | Removed | Replaced by |
620
- |---|---|
621
- | `change_map` path | `null`, plus the change statistics in the CHANGE_MAP evidence's `payload` (`total_change_pixels`, `n_components_kept`, `threshold`) |
622
- | view `artifact_ref` path | `null`, plus `payload.rendered` / `payload.retrievable` / `payload.retrieval` |
623
- | — | an explicit `warnings[]` entry saying the artifact is **NOT retrievable** |
624
-
625
- The frontend must therefore treat `artifact_ref` as **always `null` in v1** and
626
- read the payload statistics instead. A non-null ref appearing here in future
627
- means an artifact-serving endpoint was added, and this section changes with it.
628
-
629
- ---
630
-
631
- ## 3. Enumerations
632
-
633
- These are fixed by `core/schemas.py`. The frontend must treat them as closed sets
634
- for display, but **must not assume they will never grow** — an unknown value
635
- should render as its raw string, not crash.
636
-
637
- ### 3.1 `Task` (`core/schemas.py:35`)
638
-
639
- Seven values. Note `unsupported` is a `Task`, not an error — it is how "I do not
640
- know what you asked" is represented.
641
-
642
- | Value | Meaning | Assets |
643
- |---|---|---|
644
- | `vqa` | Answer a question about one image | 1 |
645
- | `caption` | Describe the image | 1 |
646
- | `grounding` | Locate a described object | 1 |
647
- | `change` | Detect change between two dates | 2 |
648
- | `optical_sar` | Fuse optical and SAR | 2 |
649
- | `change_vqa` | Answer a question about the change | 2 |
650
- | `unsupported` | The router could not map the request to a specialist | 0 |
651
-
652
- ### 3.2 Coordinate systems
653
-
654
- `CoordinateSystem` is an explicit enum on every spatial field. **This is a
655
- correctness-critical distinction** and a documented source of silent bugs.
656
-
657
- | Value | Meaning | Rendering |
658
- |---|---|---|
659
- | `normalized_0_1` | `[0, 1]`, origin **top-left** | Multiply by image width/height |
660
- | `pixel` | Absolute pixel coordinates | Use directly |
661
- | `geo` | CRS coordinates (usually EPSG:4326) | Requires a map, not a 2-D canvas |
662
-
663
- VRSBench annotations arrive normalised to **0–100**, not 0–1;
664
- `evaluation.metrics.grounding.benchmark_to_normalized` performs the conversion.
665
- **The frontend must read the `coordinate_system` field on each `Box`/`Region` and
666
- must not assume one convention.** A box drawn with the wrong assumption lands in
667
- plausible-looking wrong places.
668
-
669
- > The raw enum values are the exact strings above. Earlier drafts of this document
670
- > used shorthand (`normalized`, `geographic`); those are **wrong** and would fail
671
- > schema validation, since `extra="forbid"` and the enum is closed.
672
-
673
- ### 3.3 `Modality` (`core/schemas.py:50`)
674
-
675
- | Value | Meaning |
676
- |---|---|
677
- | `optical` | Optical only |
678
- | `sar` | SAR only |
679
- | `optical_sar` | Both fused |
680
- | `unknown` | Undetermined |
681
-
682
- ---
683
-
684
- ## 4. The confidence contract
685
-
686
- This is the subtlest part of the API and the easiest to mis-render.
687
-
688
- `ConfidenceBreakdown` (`core/schemas.py`) has:
689
-
690
- | Field | Meaning |
691
- |---|---|
692
- | `raw` | The uncalibrated score |
693
- | `calibrated` | The post-calibration score, or `null` |
694
- | `method` | `"uncalibrated"` or `"temperature_scaling"` |
695
- | `components` | A `string -> float` map of the individual signals that fed the confidence. May be empty. **Diagnostic only** — do not compute a confidence from it |
696
- | `degraded` | Whether this confidence should be trusted |
697
- | `degradation_reason` | Why, when `degraded` is `true` |
698
-
699
- **Rules the frontend MUST follow:**
700
-
701
- 1. Display `calibrated` when it is not `null`; otherwise display `raw`.
702
- 2. Display `method` next to the value. `temperature_scaling` means a fitted
703
- correction was applied; `uncalibrated` means it was not.
704
- 3. **Never present a confidence as a percentage without its method.** A raw
705
- 0.99 and a calibrated 0.99 do not mean the same thing.
706
- 4. When `degraded` is `true`, show `degradation_reason`. Confidence that is
707
- degraded is not a quality signal.
708
-
709
- > **Measured caveat, recorded honestly.** The R-02 calibration fit
710
- > (`artifacts/calibration_v001.json`, `T = 0.9772731820958189`, 16,441 Val rows)
711
- > found that the raw softmax was **already near-calibrated** (ECE 0.013755) and
712
- > that temperature scaling made ECE very slightly **worse** (0.014929) while
713
- > improving NLL marginally (0.689741 → 0.689631). The frontend must not imply
714
- > that `temperature_scaling` is inherently "more accurate" than `uncalibrated`.
715
-
716
- ---
717
-
718
- ## 5. Error contract
719
-
720
- Every non-2xx response body has this shape:
721
-
722
- ```json
723
- {
724
- "error": {
725
- "code": "pair_misaligned",
726
- "message": "The images are not sufficiently co-registered for spatial analysis.",
727
- "detail": "RMSE 4.21 px exceeds the 2.0 px budget",
728
- "recoverable": false,
729
- "request_id": "req_01H...",
730
- "run_id": "9f2c1c0e-..."
731
- }
732
- }
733
- ```
734
-
735
- `code` is **stable** and comes from `core/errors.py`. `message` is
736
- operator-safe (`SatQueryError.user_message`). `detail` is technical and may be
737
- absent.
738
-
739
- ### 5.1 HTTP status mapping
740
-
741
- | Status | When | `recoverable` |
742
- |---|---|---|
743
- | `400` | Malformed JSON, missing required field, or a malformed upload body | `false` |
744
- | `404` | The path is not an endpoint at all (`routing_error`) | `false` |
745
- | `405` | The path exists but not for this method (`routing_error`). `GET /v1/assets` is the common case: §2.5 defines it for `POST` only | `false` |
746
- | `413` | Upload exceeds the per-file size limit | `false` |
747
- | `415` | Upload's content type is absent or not on the allowlist | `false` |
748
- | `422` | Schema violation (unknown field with `extra="forbid"`, wrong enum value, `assets` empty) | `false` |
749
- | `429` | Rate limited. Honours `Retry-After` | `true` |
750
- | `500` | Unexpected internal failure | `false` |
751
- | `503` | A required model is `absent` or `unavailable`; or GPU quota exhausted; or the asset store is unconfigured or full | depends |
752
- | `504` | The specialist exceeded its budget (`specialist_timeout`) | `true` |
753
-
754
- `413` and `415` are upload-only (`POST /v1/assets`). A `415` is the expected
755
- answer to an upload with no declared `Content-Type` — the server refuses rather
756
- than guessing (§2.5).
757
-
758
- **`404` and `405` carry this same envelope**, which is worth stating because they
759
- are the two statuses a proxy framework raises before any handler runs. A client
760
- should therefore not special-case them: parse `error.code` as usual. This was
761
- made true on 2026-09-22 (the gateway previously returned the framework's own
762
- `{"detail": "Not Found"}` for both, which broke any client that assumed §5);
763
- `docs/STEP8_FINAL_CONFORMANCE_AUDIT.md` records the finding as F-3.
764
-
765
- **A trailing slash is a `307`, not an error — and this is a real footgun.**
766
- Starlette's default `redirect_slashes` behaviour applies: `GET /v1/analyze/`
767
- answers `307` with `Location: http://<gateway-host>/v1/analyze`. Two consequences
768
- a client must handle, both verified against the running app on 2026-09-22:
769
-
770
- * The `Location` is built from the gateway's own host, **not** from the client's
771
- request URL, so a redirect followed naively after a `POST` may not land where
772
- the caller expects. Do not rely on it.
773
- * A `307` preserves the method and body, so a `POST /v1/analyze/` will re-send
774
- the body to `/v1/analyze` — which is fine, but it is a second request against
775
- the rate limiter, and `/v1/analyze` is a `COSTLY_ROUTE`.
776
-
777
- **Use exact paths with no trailing slash.** This is also why the runbook's
778
- `SATQUERY_SPACE_URL` is normalised with a trailing-slash strip
779
- (`docs/BACKEND_DEPLOYMENT_RUNBOOK.md` §4.1.1).
780
-
781
- ### 5.2 The complete `code` taxonomy
782
-
783
- From `core/errors.py`. The frontend should map these to user-facing copy; the
784
- `user_message` field is a safe default.
785
-
786
- | `code` | Meaning | Suggested UX |
787
- |---|---|---|
788
- | `satquery_error` | **Base class** — the fallback when a more specific code does not apply | Generic failure. Treat an unexpected occurrence as a defect |
789
- | `input_error` | The uploaded input could not be read | Ask the user to re-upload |
790
- | `raster_read_error` | Not a readable TIFF/GeoTIFF | "This file is not a readable GeoTIFF" |
791
- | `missing_crs` | No coordinate reference system | "This image has no georeferencing" |
792
- | `unsupported_bands` | Band layout unsupported | Explain expected bands |
793
- | `oversized_image` | Exceeds the pixel budget | Offer downsampling |
794
- | `pair_incompatible` | The two images do not match | Prompt for a better pair |
795
- | `pair_misaligned` | Not co-registered | Explain alignment requirement |
796
- | `temporal_pair_invalid` | Two distinct acquisitions required | Ask for a second date |
797
- | `routing_error` | Request could not be interpreted | Offer `force_task` |
798
- | `unsupported_query` | No specialist supports this | Show the capability list |
799
- | `invalid_request` | Inputs do not support the task | Suggest a valid task |
800
- | `workflow_plan_error` | Workflow could not be planned | Retry; report if persistent |
801
- | `specialist_error` | A specialist failed | Generic failure |
802
- | `model_load_error` | A model could not be loaded | **Defect** — surface it |
803
- | `model_unavailable` | Model not available in this environment | Disable the capability |
804
- | `out_of_memory` | OOM; retry at reduced resolution | Suggest a smaller image |
805
- | `specialist_timeout` | Processing timed out | Offer retry |
806
- | `schema_validation_error` | The system produced a malformed result | **Defect** — always report |
807
- | `coordinate_error` | Invalid spatial coordinates | **Defect** |
808
- | `confidence_range_error` | Confidence out of range | **Defect** |
809
- | `leakage_violation` | A data isolation rule was violated | **Defect** — never user-facing |
810
- | `benchmark_freeze_error` | The benchmark is not frozen | Evaluation-only |
811
-
812
- **Render `user_message` as the default and override specific codes with better
813
- copy.** Do not invent a mapping from `detail` — it is not stable.
814
-
815
- ### 5.3 Gateway-origin codes (a separate set from §5.2)
816
-
817
- There is exactly **one** code a client can receive that is *not* in the table
818
- above, and it does not come from `core/errors.py`:
819
-
820
- | `code` | Meaning | Suggested UX |
821
- |---|---|---|
822
- | `rate_limited` | **Gateway-origin.** The proxy's per-IP rate limit refused the request; it never reached the Space. `429`, and `Retry-After` is set | Wait `Retry-After` seconds, then retry. Not a bug — see §7 |
823
-
824
- Why it is a separate set rather than a §5.2 row: `tests/unit/test_gateway_responsibilities.py`
825
- asserts that §5.2 and `core/errors.py` are in **exact one-to-one correspondence** (23
826
- codes), and `tests/unit/test_gateway_policy.py` asserts that a gateway-origin code
827
- may **never** shadow a taxonomy code. Both hold only if the two sets stay
828
- disjoint — so `rate_limited` is documented here, beside the taxonomy rather than
829
- inside it, and the correspondence test keeps its meaning.
830
-
831
- The gateway mints this code and only for errors that **originate in the
832
- gateway**; a code arriving from the Space is never replaced. `rate_limited` is
833
- declared in `gateway/policy.py` (`GATEWAY_ORIGIN_CODES`) because §5.1 maps HTTP
834
- `429` to "Rate limited" while the `core/errors.py` taxonomy — which covers the
835
- *analysis* pipeline, not the proxy — assigns that status no code. Recorded here
836
- on 2026-09-22, after a check of this document found the code reachable by every
837
- throttled caller yet absent from every client-facing table.
838
- `docs/PHASE19_FINAL_HARDENING.md` is the implementation record; this is the
839
- client-facing one.
840
-
841
- ---
842
-
843
- ## 6. Latency, quotas and the realities of this deployment
844
-
845
- | Constraint | Value | Source |
846
- |---|---|---|
847
- | ZeroGPU free tier | 5 GPU-minutes/day | plan section 48; `configs/deploy.yaml` |
848
- | Declared GPU durations | vqa 20 s · grounding 45 s · change 30 s · optical_sar 45 s | `configs/deploy.yaml` |
849
- | Resident models | **1** (`cache_max_models: 1`) | `configs/deploy.yaml` |
850
- | `torch.compile` | **Disabled** — ZeroGPU does not support it (finding C-8) | `configs/deploy.yaml` |
851
- | Lazy loading | Enabled — first request for a capability pays a cold start | `configs/deploy.yaml` |
852
- | Server budget | `agent.timeout_seconds` | `configs/base.yaml` |
853
-
854
- **Frontend obligations:**
855
-
856
- 1. **Show a progress state.** A cold start can take tens of seconds. There is no
857
- streaming API in v1; the client sends one request and waits.
858
- 2. **Do not poll `/v1/health` aggressively.** Every `/v1/analyze` costs GPU
859
- quota; health checks cost CPU. Polling health in a loop is fine; retrying
860
- analyze in a loop is not.
861
- 3. **Serialize requests.** With `cache_max_models: 1`, two concurrent analyses
862
- for different tasks will evict each other and make both slower. If the UI
863
- allows a queue, process it one at a time.
864
- 4. **Handle `429` and `503` as normal states**, not as bugs. Quota exhaustion is
865
- an expected condition on the free tier.
866
-
867
- ---
868
-
869
- ## 7. Authentication
870
-
871
- **There is no authentication in v1.** This is a recorded boundary, not an
872
- oversight.
873
-
874
- Plan section 74 (Production Readiness Boundary) explicitly excludes auth,
875
- multi-tenancy, distributed queues and autoscaling from scope. Consequently:
876
-
877
- - The API must **not** be exposed on the open internet without a gateway-imposed
878
- control. The intended control is the Railway gateway (§`docs/DEPLOYMENT_ARCHITECTURE.md`).
879
- - Any credentials (HF token, gateway allowlist) live **server-side only** and are
880
- never sent to the browser.
881
- - The frontend **must not** embed an HF token, an API key, or any secret. It
882
- talks only to the gateway.
883
-
884
- **Do not build a login screen.** There is no auth to log into.
885
-
886
- ### 7.1 CORS
887
-
888
- The gateway sets CORS explicitly to the deployed frontend origin. It does not use
889
- a wildcard. A preflight `OPTIONS` is answered by the gateway, not by the HF Space.
890
-
891
- ---
892
-
893
- ## 8. Status of this contract
894
-
895
- | Element | Status |
896
- |---|---|
897
- | Endpoint surface (`/v1/health`, `/v1/capabilities`, `/v1/analyze`, `/v1/assets`) | **Fixed** — 3 by the plan, the 4th by the owner ruling of 2026-09-22 (§2.5) |
898
- | Request/response shapes | **Existing and tested** — `core/schemas.py` |
899
- | Error taxonomy and `code` values | **Existing and tested** — `core/errors.py` |
900
- | Error envelope (`{"error": {...}}`) | **Specified here.** The gateway must produce it; the Space's own errors are translated by the gateway |
901
- | `POST /v1/assets` | **Implemented**, Option A, §2.5. Upload against it |
902
- | Multipart upload into `/v1/analyze` | **Not implemented**, and not chosen — Option B was rejected, §2.5.1 |
903
- | How the contract is **verified** | `docs/ITEM5_INTEGRATION_SUITE_SCOPE.md` records what the 26-test integration suite proves (the app's *boundary*, in-process) and what only a live deployment can prove (reachability, cold start, memory ceilings). Read it before treating a green `tests/integration` run as evidence about a deployment — **no test in this repository dials a network address**, including this contract's own `/v1/*` examples |
904
- | Authentication | **Deliberately absent** (plan section 74) |
905
- | Streaming / progress | **Not in v1** |
906
- | Rate-limit values | **Not specified by the plan.** The gateway must choose them; ask the maintainer |
907
- | Asset TTL, size cap and content-type allowlist values | **Deployment configuration**, not contract constants. The *shape* of each guarantee is fixed (§2.5); the *value* is read from the environment per deployment |
908
-
909
- **Nothing in the "Status" column above may be treated as settled if it says
910
- "Not in v1", "Not implemented" or "Not specified by the plan"** — unless the row
911
- also names a decision that closed it. Those are gaps this document surfaces
912
- rather than fills.
913
-
914
- ---
915
-
916
- ## 9. Minimal frontend integration checklist
917
-
918
- 1. `GET /v1/health` on load → show service state, including `degraded`.
919
- 2. `GET /v1/capabilities` → build affordances from the response. Disable
920
- unavailable tasks **with their reason shown**.
921
- 3. For each analysis: (a) `POST /v1/assets` per image → collect `asset_id`
922
- values; (b) `POST /v1/analyze` with `assets`, `query`, optional `force_task`.
923
- 4. Render `result.answer`, then `confidence` per §4, then `result.warnings`
924
- and `confidence.degradation_reason` if present.
925
- 5. Draw `boxes`/`regions` using **each item's own `coordinate_system`**.
926
- 6. Map errors per §5. Default to `user_message`; special-case the codes flagged
927
- as defects so they are reported rather than swallowed.
928
- 7. Serialize analyses. Do not retry `429`/`503` in a tight loop.
929
- 8. Never embed a secret. Never build a login screen.