fix(ovhcloud): use the API endpoint as configured, for both schemes (1.2.5)

1.2.0 rewrote /1.0 to /v1 whenever a service account was in use, reasoning from a
documentation example that showed OAuth2 against a /v1 path. It was wrong, and it
was the cause of the 404s and the 500 that followed: OVH's own API console issues
Bearer requests against /1.0, while /v1 — which exists, and answers 401
unauthenticated like any live route — answers 500 with an empty body for a token
on the telephony routes. A failure with no message at all, produced by a helpful
rewrite nobody asked for.

The endpoint is now whatever was typed, for both authentication schemes. The
config field says where to copy it from.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01TN1R4EnNFUV2Xwtd9q98tj

integrations/ovhcloud/manifest.yaml

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 id: ovhcloud
 name: OVHcloud
-version: 1.2.3
+version: 1.2.5
 description: "OVHcloud (API v1) — cloud account and infrastructure visibility, plus VoIP on-call routing: read the account, list public cloud projects, list/read dedicated servers, and hold Riposte's on-call ladder in a telephony call queue so a client number reaches whoever is on duty without any channel on your own PBX. Signed application-key authentication; stdlib-only, no extra Python dependencies. (French vendor.)"
-changelog: "1.2.3 — The Test button now WALKS to the queue one step at a time and reports what it saw at each: the billing accounts the credentials can reach, the services each product holds, the queues in the one chosen. A bare 404 from this API means a wrong account, a wrong service name, the other product, or a number nobody configured — four jobs, one message — and none of them could be told apart from Riposte. It also answers its own version, because when a test fails identically twice the first question is whether the new code is the code that ran. | 1.2.2 — Find the call queue under either product. OVH files a queue under easyHunting or under ovhPabx depending on the number's offer, and the control panel says \"File d'appels\" for both — so assuming the first answered 404 \"This service does not exist\", which sounds like a wrong number and is in fact a wrong product. The product is now discovered once per run, and a service found under neither says which names DO exist. | 1.2.1 — The Test button now probes what the instance is FOR: with telephony coordinates filled in it reads the call queue, which proves the credentials, the IAM policy, the billing account, the service and the queue at once. It used to read /me unconditionally, so a service account correctly narrowed to /telephony failed its own test with a 403 on account:apiovh:me/get — credentials that were perfect, reported as broken. | 1.2.0 — Accept a SERVICE ACCOUNT (OAuth2 client credentials) as well as the historical application keys, because that is what the control panel offers on accounts where application keys are not available. Which scheme is used is decided by what you filled in, not by a mode selector, and an existing instance keeps working untouched. The API base is corrected to /v1 for a service account, since a Bearer token sent to the legacy /1.0 spelling fails in a way that reads as bad credentials. | 1.1.0 — On-call routing: set_oncall_ladder / get_oncall_ladder / list_calls, backed by a VoIP call queue (easyHunting). Riposte publishes the ordered on-call numbers and the carrier rings them in that order, so an inbound client call never crosses your own trunk and spends no simultaneous call on it. Needs the three telephony_* config fields; every other command is unchanged. | 1.0.0 — Initial release: get account, list cloud projects, list/get dedicated servers."
+changelog: "1.2.5 — Stop rewriting the API path for a service account. 1.2.0 turned /1.0 into /v1 on the strength of a documentation example, and OVH's own console issues Bearer requests against /1.0 — while /v1 answers 500 with an empty body for a token on the telephony routes. The endpoint is now used exactly as configured, for both authentication schemes. | 1.2.4 — The billing-account listing is no longer fatal. On a service account it can answer 500 with an empty body while every account-scoped route underneath works — so the diagnostic step was failing the test it exists to explain, and hiding the answer behind its own failure. When neither product can be listed either, the error now names what each HTTP code means and points at the application-key fallback. | 1.2.3 — The Test button now WALKS to the queue one step at a time and reports what it saw at each: the billing accounts the credentials can reach, the services each product holds, the queues in the one chosen. A bare 404 from this API means a wrong account, a wrong service name, the other product, or a number nobody configured — four jobs, one message — and none of them could be told apart from Riposte. It also answers its own version, because when a test fails identically twice the first question is whether the new code is the code that ran. | 1.2.2 — Find the call queue under either product. OVH files a queue under easyHunting or under ovhPabx depending on the number's offer, and the control panel says \"File d'appels\" for both — so assuming the first answered 404 \"This service does not exist\", which sounds like a wrong number and is in fact a wrong product. The product is now discovered once per run, and a service found under neither says which names DO exist. | 1.2.1 — The Test button now probes what the instance is FOR: with telephony coordinates filled in it reads the call queue, which proves the credentials, the IAM policy, the billing account, the service and the queue at once. It used to read /me unconditionally, so a service account correctly narrowed to /telephony failed its own test with a 403 on account:apiovh:me/get — credentials that were perfect, reported as broken. | 1.2.0 — Accept a SERVICE ACCOUNT (OAuth2 client credentials) as well as the historical application keys, because that is what the control panel offers on accounts where application keys are not available. Which scheme is used is decided by what you filled in, not by a mode selector, and an existing instance keeps working untouched. The API base is corrected to /v1 for a service account, since a Bearer token sent to the legacy /1.0 spelling fails in a way that reads as bad credentials. | 1.1.0 — On-call routing: set_oncall_ladder / get_oncall_ladder / list_calls, backed by a VoIP call queue (easyHunting). Riposte publishes the ordered on-call numbers and the carrier rings them in that order, so an inbound client call never crosses your own trunk and spends no simultaneous call on it. Needs the three telephony_* config fields; every other command is unchanged. | 1.0.0 — Initial release: get account, list cloud projects, list/get dedicated servers."
 category: cloud
 
 # Per-instance configuration. Requests are signed (SHA-1) with the application
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ config_schema:
   properties:
     endpoint:
       type: string
-      description: "OVH API endpoint"
+      description: "OVH API endpoint, copied from the API console — used exactly as typed, for both authentication schemes"
       default: "https://eu.api.ovh.com/1.0"
     # ── credentials: fill in ONE of the two sets ─────────────────────────
     #

integrations/ovhcloud/scripts/get_account.py

@@ -34,23 +34,21 @@ def _oauth(cfg):
 
 
 def _endpoint(cfg):
-    """The API base, corrected to match the credentials in use.
+    """The API base, exactly as configured.
 
-    The same routes answer under /1.0 and under /v1; the first is the signed
-    scheme's historical spelling and the second is the one OAuth2 documents. An
-    operator should not have to know that, so a service account gets /v1 whatever
-    was typed — a Bearer token sent to the legacy spelling is the kind of failure
-    that reads as "bad credentials" and sends somebody to regenerate a perfectly
-    good secret.
+    IT USED TO REWRITE /1.0 TO /v1 FOR A SERVICE ACCOUNT, on the strength of a
+    documentation example that showed OAuth2 against a /v1 path. That was wrong and
+    cost two rounds of debugging: OVH's own API console issues Bearer requests
+    against /1.0, and /v1 — which exists, and answers 401 unauthenticated like any
+    live route — answers 500 with an empty body for a token on the telephony
+    routes. A failure with no message, produced by a helpful rewrite nobody asked
+    for.
+
+    So the endpoint is now whatever was typed, for both schemes. Both spellings
+    work for the signed scheme; only the configured one is used, and OVH's console
+    is the place to copy it from.
     """
-    raw = (str(cfg.get("endpoint") or "https://eu.api.ovh.com/1.0")).rstrip("/")
-    if not _oauth(cfg):
-        return raw
-    if raw.endswith("/1.0"):
-        return raw[:-4] + "/v1"
-    if raw.endswith("/v1") or raw.endswith("/v2"):
-        return raw
-    return raw + "/v1"
+    return (str(cfg.get("endpoint") or "https://eu.api.ovh.com/1.0")).rstrip("/")
 
 
 def _token_url(cfg):

integrations/ovhcloud/scripts/get_dedicated_server.py

@@ -34,23 +34,21 @@ def _oauth(cfg):
 
 
 def _endpoint(cfg):
-    """The API base, corrected to match the credentials in use.
+    """The API base, exactly as configured.
 
-    The same routes answer under /1.0 and under /v1; the first is the signed
-    scheme's historical spelling and the second is the one OAuth2 documents. An
-    operator should not have to know that, so a service account gets /v1 whatever
-    was typed — a Bearer token sent to the legacy spelling is the kind of failure
-    that reads as "bad credentials" and sends somebody to regenerate a perfectly
-    good secret.
+    IT USED TO REWRITE /1.0 TO /v1 FOR A SERVICE ACCOUNT, on the strength of a
+    documentation example that showed OAuth2 against a /v1 path. That was wrong and
+    cost two rounds of debugging: OVH's own API console issues Bearer requests
+    against /1.0, and /v1 — which exists, and answers 401 unauthenticated like any
+    live route — answers 500 with an empty body for a token on the telephony
+    routes. A failure with no message, produced by a helpful rewrite nobody asked
+    for.
+
+    So the endpoint is now whatever was typed, for both schemes. Both spellings
+    work for the signed scheme; only the configured one is used, and OVH's console
+    is the place to copy it from.
     """
-    raw = (str(cfg.get("endpoint") or "https://eu.api.ovh.com/1.0")).rstrip("/")
-    if not _oauth(cfg):
-        return raw
-    if raw.endswith("/1.0"):
-        return raw[:-4] + "/v1"
-    if raw.endswith("/v1") or raw.endswith("/v2"):
-        return raw
-    return raw + "/v1"
+    return (str(cfg.get("endpoint") or "https://eu.api.ovh.com/1.0")).rstrip("/")
 
 
 def _token_url(cfg):

integrations/ovhcloud/scripts/get_oncall_ladder.py

@@ -34,23 +34,21 @@ def _oauth(cfg):
 
 
 def _endpoint(cfg):
-    """The API base, corrected to match the credentials in use.
+    """The API base, exactly as configured.
 
-    The same routes answer under /1.0 and under /v1; the first is the signed
-    scheme's historical spelling and the second is the one OAuth2 documents. An
-    operator should not have to know that, so a service account gets /v1 whatever
-    was typed — a Bearer token sent to the legacy spelling is the kind of failure
-    that reads as "bad credentials" and sends somebody to regenerate a perfectly
-    good secret.
+    IT USED TO REWRITE /1.0 TO /v1 FOR A SERVICE ACCOUNT, on the strength of a
+    documentation example that showed OAuth2 against a /v1 path. That was wrong and
+    cost two rounds of debugging: OVH's own API console issues Bearer requests
+    against /1.0, and /v1 — which exists, and answers 401 unauthenticated like any
+    live route — answers 500 with an empty body for a token on the telephony
+    routes. A failure with no message, produced by a helpful rewrite nobody asked
+    for.
+
+    So the endpoint is now whatever was typed, for both schemes. Both spellings
+    work for the signed scheme; only the configured one is used, and OVH's console
+    is the place to copy it from.
     """
-    raw = (str(cfg.get("endpoint") or "https://eu.api.ovh.com/1.0")).rstrip("/")
-    if not _oauth(cfg):
-        return raw
-    if raw.endswith("/1.0"):
-        return raw[:-4] + "/v1"
-    if raw.endswith("/v1") or raw.endswith("/v2"):
-        return raw
-    return raw + "/v1"
+    return (str(cfg.get("endpoint") or "https://eu.api.ovh.com/1.0")).rstrip("/")
 
 
 def _token_url(cfg):

integrations/ovhcloud/scripts/list_calls.py

@@ -34,23 +34,21 @@ def _oauth(cfg):
 
 
 def _endpoint(cfg):
-    """The API base, corrected to match the credentials in use.
+    """The API base, exactly as configured.
 
-    The same routes answer under /1.0 and under /v1; the first is the signed
-    scheme's historical spelling and the second is the one OAuth2 documents. An
-    operator should not have to know that, so a service account gets /v1 whatever
-    was typed — a Bearer token sent to the legacy spelling is the kind of failure
-    that reads as "bad credentials" and sends somebody to regenerate a perfectly
-    good secret.
+    IT USED TO REWRITE /1.0 TO /v1 FOR A SERVICE ACCOUNT, on the strength of a
+    documentation example that showed OAuth2 against a /v1 path. That was wrong and
+    cost two rounds of debugging: OVH's own API console issues Bearer requests
+    against /1.0, and /v1 — which exists, and answers 401 unauthenticated like any
+    live route — answers 500 with an empty body for a token on the telephony
+    routes. A failure with no message, produced by a helpful rewrite nobody asked
+    for.
+
+    So the endpoint is now whatever was typed, for both schemes. Both spellings
+    work for the signed scheme; only the configured one is used, and OVH's console
+    is the place to copy it from.
     """
-    raw = (str(cfg.get("endpoint") or "https://eu.api.ovh.com/1.0")).rstrip("/")
-    if not _oauth(cfg):
-        return raw
-    if raw.endswith("/1.0"):
-        return raw[:-4] + "/v1"
-    if raw.endswith("/v1") or raw.endswith("/v2"):
-        return raw
-    return raw + "/v1"
+    return (str(cfg.get("endpoint") or "https://eu.api.ovh.com/1.0")).rstrip("/")
 
 
 def _token_url(cfg):

integrations/ovhcloud/scripts/list_cloud_projects.py

@@ -34,23 +34,21 @@ def _oauth(cfg):
 
 
 def _endpoint(cfg):
-    """The API base, corrected to match the credentials in use.
+    """The API base, exactly as configured.
 
-    The same routes answer under /1.0 and under /v1; the first is the signed
-    scheme's historical spelling and the second is the one OAuth2 documents. An
-    operator should not have to know that, so a service account gets /v1 whatever
-    was typed — a Bearer token sent to the legacy spelling is the kind of failure
-    that reads as "bad credentials" and sends somebody to regenerate a perfectly
-    good secret.
+    IT USED TO REWRITE /1.0 TO /v1 FOR A SERVICE ACCOUNT, on the strength of a
+    documentation example that showed OAuth2 against a /v1 path. That was wrong and
+    cost two rounds of debugging: OVH's own API console issues Bearer requests
+    against /1.0, and /v1 — which exists, and answers 401 unauthenticated like any
+    live route — answers 500 with an empty body for a token on the telephony
+    routes. A failure with no message, produced by a helpful rewrite nobody asked
+    for.
+
+    So the endpoint is now whatever was typed, for both schemes. Both spellings
+    work for the signed scheme; only the configured one is used, and OVH's console
+    is the place to copy it from.
     """
-    raw = (str(cfg.get("endpoint") or "https://eu.api.ovh.com/1.0")).rstrip("/")
-    if not _oauth(cfg):
-        return raw
-    if raw.endswith("/1.0"):
-        return raw[:-4] + "/v1"
-    if raw.endswith("/v1") or raw.endswith("/v2"):
-        return raw
-    return raw + "/v1"
+    return (str(cfg.get("endpoint") or "https://eu.api.ovh.com/1.0")).rstrip("/")
 
 
 def _token_url(cfg):

integrations/ovhcloud/scripts/list_dedicated_servers.py

@@ -34,23 +34,21 @@ def _oauth(cfg):
 
 
 def _endpoint(cfg):
-    """The API base, corrected to match the credentials in use.
+    """The API base, exactly as configured.
 
-    The same routes answer under /1.0 and under /v1; the first is the signed
-    scheme's historical spelling and the second is the one OAuth2 documents. An
-    operator should not have to know that, so a service account gets /v1 whatever
-    was typed — a Bearer token sent to the legacy spelling is the kind of failure
-    that reads as "bad credentials" and sends somebody to regenerate a perfectly
-    good secret.
+    IT USED TO REWRITE /1.0 TO /v1 FOR A SERVICE ACCOUNT, on the strength of a
+    documentation example that showed OAuth2 against a /v1 path. That was wrong and
+    cost two rounds of debugging: OVH's own API console issues Bearer requests
+    against /1.0, and /v1 — which exists, and answers 401 unauthenticated like any
+    live route — answers 500 with an empty body for a token on the telephony
+    routes. A failure with no message, produced by a helpful rewrite nobody asked
+    for.
+
+    So the endpoint is now whatever was typed, for both schemes. Both spellings
+    work for the signed scheme; only the configured one is used, and OVH's console
+    is the place to copy it from.
     """
-    raw = (str(cfg.get("endpoint") or "https://eu.api.ovh.com/1.0")).rstrip("/")
-    if not _oauth(cfg):
-        return raw
-    if raw.endswith("/1.0"):
-        return raw[:-4] + "/v1"
-    if raw.endswith("/v1") or raw.endswith("/v2"):
-        return raw
-    return raw + "/v1"
+    return (str(cfg.get("endpoint") or "https://eu.api.ovh.com/1.0")).rstrip("/")
 
 
 def _token_url(cfg):

integrations/ovhcloud/scripts/set_oncall_ladder.py

@@ -34,23 +34,21 @@ def _oauth(cfg):
 
 
 def _endpoint(cfg):
-    """The API base, corrected to match the credentials in use.
+    """The API base, exactly as configured.
 
-    The same routes answer under /1.0 and under /v1; the first is the signed
-    scheme's historical spelling and the second is the one OAuth2 documents. An
-    operator should not have to know that, so a service account gets /v1 whatever
-    was typed — a Bearer token sent to the legacy spelling is the kind of failure
-    that reads as "bad credentials" and sends somebody to regenerate a perfectly
-    good secret.
+    IT USED TO REWRITE /1.0 TO /v1 FOR A SERVICE ACCOUNT, on the strength of a
+    documentation example that showed OAuth2 against a /v1 path. That was wrong and
+    cost two rounds of debugging: OVH's own API console issues Bearer requests
+    against /1.0, and /v1 — which exists, and answers 401 unauthenticated like any
+    live route — answers 500 with an empty body for a token on the telephony
+    routes. A failure with no message, produced by a helpful rewrite nobody asked
+    for.
+
+    So the endpoint is now whatever was typed, for both schemes. Both spellings
+    work for the signed scheme; only the configured one is used, and OVH's console
+    is the place to copy it from.
     """
-    raw = (str(cfg.get("endpoint") or "https://eu.api.ovh.com/1.0")).rstrip("/")
-    if not _oauth(cfg):
-        return raw
-    if raw.endswith("/1.0"):
-        return raw[:-4] + "/v1"
-    if raw.endswith("/v1") or raw.endswith("/v2"):
-        return raw
-    return raw + "/v1"
+    return (str(cfg.get("endpoint") or "https://eu.api.ovh.com/1.0")).rstrip("/")
 
 
 def _token_url(cfg):

integrations/ovhcloud/scripts/test_connection.py

@@ -34,23 +34,21 @@ def _oauth(cfg):
 
 
 def _endpoint(cfg):
-    """The API base, corrected to match the credentials in use.
+    """The API base, exactly as configured.
 
-    The same routes answer under /1.0 and under /v1; the first is the signed
-    scheme's historical spelling and the second is the one OAuth2 documents. An
-    operator should not have to know that, so a service account gets /v1 whatever
-    was typed — a Bearer token sent to the legacy spelling is the kind of failure
-    that reads as "bad credentials" and sends somebody to regenerate a perfectly
-    good secret.
+    IT USED TO REWRITE /1.0 TO /v1 FOR A SERVICE ACCOUNT, on the strength of a
+    documentation example that showed OAuth2 against a /v1 path. That was wrong and
+    cost two rounds of debugging: OVH's own API console issues Bearer requests
+    against /1.0, and /v1 — which exists, and answers 401 unauthenticated like any
+    live route — answers 500 with an empty body for a token on the telephony
+    routes. A failure with no message, produced by a helpful rewrite nobody asked
+    for.
+
+    So the endpoint is now whatever was typed, for both schemes. Both spellings
+    work for the signed scheme; only the configured one is used, and OVH's console
+    is the place to copy it from.
     """
-    raw = (str(cfg.get("endpoint") or "https://eu.api.ovh.com/1.0")).rstrip("/")
-    if not _oauth(cfg):
-        return raw
-    if raw.endswith("/1.0"):
-        return raw[:-4] + "/v1"
-    if raw.endswith("/v1") or raw.endswith("/v2"):
-        return raw
-    return raw + "/v1"
+    return (str(cfg.get("endpoint") or "https://eu.api.ovh.com/1.0")).rstrip("/")
 
 
 def _token_url(cfg):
@@ -240,7 +238,7 @@ def _queue_id(cfg):
 # It also answers its own VERSION. When a test fails identically twice, the first
 # question is whether the new code is the code that ran, and nothing on the screen
 # could answer it.
-VERSION = "1.2.3"
+VERSION = "1.2.5"
 
 
 def _try(step, fn):
@@ -264,20 +262,26 @@ def _walk(cfg, inputs):
         out.update({"ok": True, "nichandle": resp.get("nichandle")})
         return out
 
-    # 1. What can these credentials see at all? It proves the token AND the IAM
-    #    policy in one call, and names the accounts — so a mistyped billing account
-    #    is visible rather than inferred.
+    # 1. What can these credentials see at all? Useful when it works, and NEVER
+    #    FATAL when it does not.
+    #
+    #    It is a diagnostic, not a dependency: nothing in this integration needs the
+    #    list of billing accounts, and on a service account this route has been seen
+    #    to answer 500 with an empty body while every account-scoped route underneath
+    #    it works perfectly. A diagnostic step that fails the test it exists to
+    #    explain is worse than no step at all — it hides the answer behind its own
+    #    failure, which is exactly what it did here.
     accounts, err = _try("listing telephony billing accounts", lambda: request("GET", "/telephony", cfg))
     if err:
-        out.update({"ok": False, "step": "billing accounts", "detail": err})
-        return out
-    accounts = [str(a) for a in (accounts or [])]
-    out["billing_accounts"] = accounts
-    if ba not in accounts:
-        out.update({"ok": False, "step": "billing account",
-                    "detail": "%s is not one of the accounts these credentials can see: [%s]"
-                              % (ba, ", ".join(accounts) or "none")})
-        return out
+        out["billing_accounts"] = "could not be listed (" + err + ") — not fatal, carrying on"
+    else:
+        accounts = [str(a) for a in (accounts or [])]
+        out["billing_accounts"] = accounts
+        if ba not in accounts:
+            out.update({"ok": False, "step": "billing account",
+                        "detail": "%s is not one of the accounts these credentials can see: [%s]"
+                                  % (ba, ", ".join(accounts) or "none")})
+            return out
 
     # 2. Which product holds the queue, and under what name. Both are listed even on
     #    success: seeing the OTHER product empty is what tells somebody their number
@@ -294,9 +298,22 @@ def _walk(cfg, inputs):
             product = name
             break
     if product is None:
-        out.update({"ok": False, "step": "service",
-                    "detail": "%s is not a call queue on %s. Configure the number as a call queue in the "
-                              "control panel, or set telephony_service to one of the names listed above." % (service, ba)})
+        listed = [n for p in _PRODUCTS for n in (services[p] if isinstance(services[p], list) else [])]
+        failures = [services[p] for p in _PRODUCTS if not isinstance(services[p], list)]
+        if not listed and failures:
+            # Neither product could even be LISTED. That is not a wrong service name,
+            # it is the account or the credentials — and the three shapes it comes in
+            # want three different answers, so they are named rather than merged.
+            detail = ("neither product could be listed on %s. A 403 means the IAM policy is missing the "
+                      "telephony actions; a 404 means this billing account does not exist under these "
+                      "credentials; a 500 on every telephony route means this service account cannot reach "
+                      "the telephony API at all, and the way round is an application key from "
+                      "https://api.ovh.com/createToken/ (fill in application_key, application_secret and "
+                      "consumer_key instead). Details: %s") % (ba, " | ".join(failures))
+        else:
+            detail = ("%s is not a call queue on %s. Configure the number as a call queue in the control "
+                      "panel, or set telephony_service to one of the names listed above." % (service, ba))
+        out.update({"ok": False, "step": "service", "detail": detail})
         return out
     out["product"] = product
     _CACHE["product"] = product