@frontera-sdk/blueprint 1.50.64 → 1.50.66

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "@frontera-sdk/blueprint",
-  "version": "1.50.64",
+  "version": "1.50.66",
   "description": "React hooks for reading Blueprint data and invoking governed Actions from inside a Frontera app.",
   "keywords": [
     "frontera",
@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@
     "smoke": "bun run scripts/smoke.ts"
   },
   "dependencies": {
-    "@frontera-sdk/core": "1.50.64"
+    "@frontera-sdk/core": "1.50.66"
   },
   "peerDependencies": {
     "@tanstack/react-query": "^5.90.21",

package/src/action-types.ts

@@ -138,6 +138,54 @@ export interface ActionDescriptor {
   inputSchema: Record<string, unknown>
 }
 
+/**
+ * What raised a request, in the only terms a reader can act on.
+ *
+ * `person` is someone acting for themselves. `agent` is an Agent acting under
+ * a person's authority — `agentName` says which Agent, `userId` says whose
+ * authority. `automation` is an unattended caller that is not an Agent, so
+ * there is no Agent name to show; `userId` still names the person it ran for.
+ *
+ * The split matters when you build an approval screen. "Raised by Alia" and
+ * "raised by the Collections Agent, under Alia's authority" are different
+ * things to approve, and flattening them into one line hides the one an
+ * approver most needs to see.
+ */
+export interface ActionRequestRequester {
+  kind: 'agent' | 'person' | 'automation'
+  agentId: string | null
+  agentName: string | null
+  userId: string | null
+}
+
+/**
+ * What a request is asking for, ready to render.
+ *
+ * A queue row on its own says a request exists and what state it is in. This
+ * says what would happen if it were approved: which Action, with which
+ * parameter values, for what stated reason, raised by whom. Read-only — none
+ * of it is sent back on a decision, so editing it locally changes nothing
+ * about what the platform would run.
+ *
+ * `input` is keyed by the Action's parameter API names, the same names
+ * `submit` takes — so a form that collects a value and a screen that reviews
+ * it agree on what to call it.
+ *
+ * A parameter the Action declares as confidential or restricted arrives as the
+ * literal string `'[redacted]'`. Show it as withheld rather than as an empty
+ * value: the parameter WAS supplied, and the approver is simply not the
+ * audience for it.
+ */
+export interface ActionRequestIntent {
+  actionApiName: string
+  actionDisplayName: string
+  /** Submitted values, keyed by parameter API name. */
+  input: Record<string, unknown>
+  reason: string | null
+  correlationId: string | null
+  requester: ActionRequestRequester
+}
+
 export interface ActionRequest {
   id: string
   actionDefinitionId: string
@@ -146,6 +194,20 @@ export interface ActionRequest {
   effectCertainty?: ActionEffectCertainty
   createdAt?: string
   updatedAt?: string
+  /**
+   * What the request is asking for. Present on reads of a single request and
+   * on listed requests; absent on the reply to a write, where the caller
+   * already holds what it just sent.
+   *
+   * `null` is a real state, not a failure to handle with a retry or an error
+   * banner: the platform can still say what state the request is in but cannot
+   * honestly say what it asks for — usually because the Action's published
+   * definition has moved on and there is no longer a name or a parameter list
+   * to show it against. Render the row with its lifecycle, say the details are
+   * unavailable, and keep the decision controls governed as they already are.
+   * Never fall back to a guess.
+   */
+  intent?: ActionRequestIntent | null
 }
 
 /**