ldraney/godaddy-tofu
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 2 Pull requests 1 Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Add swagger analysis docs for each API group #15

New issue
Closed
opened 2026-06-14 17:45:14 +00:00 by ldraney · 0 comments
ldraney commented 2026-06-14 17:45:14 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Type

Feature

Lineage

Standalone -- discovered during API coverage review of all 10 GoDaddy swagger specs.

Repo

ldraney/godaddy-tofu

User Story

As a platform operator
I want a structured analysis doc for each GoDaddy API group
So that I can make informed priority decisions about which API groups to implement in the Tofu provider

Context

The godaddy-tofu provider targets 121 endpoints across 10 swagger specs. DNS (P0) and Domains (P1) are already prioritized, but the remaining 8 API groups need documented analysis to confirm or adjust their priority rankings. Each doc lives under docs/swagger/ and follows a consistent format: overview, endpoints table, IaC potential assessment, platform relevance, mermaid diagram, and priority recommendation.

File Targets

Files the agent should create:

  • docs/swagger/abuse.md -- Abuse API analysis
  • docs/swagger/aftermarket.md -- Aftermarket API analysis
  • docs/swagger/agreements.md -- Agreements API analysis
  • docs/swagger/certificates.md -- Certificates API analysis
  • docs/swagger/countries.md -- Countries API analysis
  • docs/swagger/domains.md -- Domains API analysis
  • docs/swagger/orders.md -- Orders API analysis
  • docs/swagger/shoppers.md -- Shoppers API analysis
  • docs/swagger/subscriptions.md -- Subscriptions API analysis

Files the agent should NOT touch:

  • docs/api-groups.md -- existing overview, will be updated separately if needed

Feature Flag

none

Acceptance Criteria

  • Each API group has a doc under docs/swagger/
  • Each doc includes: overview, endpoints table, IaC potential, platform relevance, mermaid diagram, priority recommendation
  • Priority recommendations are justified with rationale

Test Expectations

  • Docs render correctly in Forgejo markdown viewer
  • Mermaid diagrams are valid
  • Run command: n/a (docs only)

Constraints

  • Follow consistent format across all docs
  • Reference platform architecture (Arch box k3s, Hetzner edge at 178.156.129.142, palinks.app, landscaping-assistant.app)
  • Use existing swagger JSON specs in docs/ as source material

Checklist

  • PR opened
  • No unrelated changes

Related

  • godaddy-tofu -- this project
### Type Feature ### Lineage Standalone -- discovered during API coverage review of all 10 GoDaddy swagger specs. ### Repo `ldraney/godaddy-tofu` ### User Story As a platform operator I want a structured analysis doc for each GoDaddy API group So that I can make informed priority decisions about which API groups to implement in the Tofu provider ### Context The godaddy-tofu provider targets 121 endpoints across 10 swagger specs. DNS (P0) and Domains (P1) are already prioritized, but the remaining 8 API groups need documented analysis to confirm or adjust their priority rankings. Each doc lives under `docs/swagger/` and follows a consistent format: overview, endpoints table, IaC potential assessment, platform relevance, mermaid diagram, and priority recommendation. ### File Targets Files the agent should create: - `docs/swagger/abuse.md` -- Abuse API analysis - `docs/swagger/aftermarket.md` -- Aftermarket API analysis - `docs/swagger/agreements.md` -- Agreements API analysis - `docs/swagger/certificates.md` -- Certificates API analysis - `docs/swagger/countries.md` -- Countries API analysis - `docs/swagger/domains.md` -- Domains API analysis - `docs/swagger/orders.md` -- Orders API analysis - `docs/swagger/shoppers.md` -- Shoppers API analysis - `docs/swagger/subscriptions.md` -- Subscriptions API analysis Files the agent should NOT touch: - `docs/api-groups.md` -- existing overview, will be updated separately if needed ### Feature Flag none ### Acceptance Criteria - [ ] Each API group has a doc under `docs/swagger/` - [ ] Each doc includes: overview, endpoints table, IaC potential, platform relevance, mermaid diagram, priority recommendation - [ ] Priority recommendations are justified with rationale ### Test Expectations - [ ] Docs render correctly in Forgejo markdown viewer - [ ] Mermaid diagrams are valid - Run command: n/a (docs only) ### Constraints - Follow consistent format across all docs - Reference platform architecture (Arch box k3s, Hetzner edge at 178.156.129.142, palinks.app, landscaping-assistant.app) - Use existing swagger JSON specs in `docs/` as source material ### Checklist - [ ] PR opened - [ ] No unrelated changes ### Related - `godaddy-tofu` -- this project
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag specified
Branches Tags
main
docs/keycloak-public-ingress
No results found.
Labels
Clear labels
No items
No labels
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
ldraney/godaddy-tofu#15
No description provided.