Release v1.1.2

[roeai-release-bot]

This PR updates the Python SDK for release 1.1.2.

Generated from:

• roe-main release branch 1-0-85
• roe-main commit c912ec5a511f87eab2b1fe63f0de5ea22e7c8af4

[greptile-apps]

Greptile Summary

This PR releases v1.1.2 of the Python SDK, adding a Knowledge Base API (13 new endpoints covering draft management, regeneration, finalization, and lens operations) and a new artifact-retrieval endpoint for agent jobs.

• All low-level generated code for the Knowledge Base API (src/roe/_generated/api/knowledge_base/) and models are present, but no high-level KnowledgeBaseAPI class or RoeClient.knowledge_base property was added, so every KB example in SDK_EXAMPLES.md raises AttributeError.
• Similarly, agents_jobs_artifacts_result_retrieve was generated but AgentJobsAPI.retrieve_artifact() was never added to agents.py, so that documented method is also broken at the public API level.

Confidence Score: 3/5

The generated code and models are correct, but two advertised features are completely unreachable from the public client — the KB API and the artifact-retrieval method both raise AttributeError on any call.

Both the Knowledge Base API (all 13 operations) and retrieve_artifact are documented in SDK_EXAMPLES.md, yet neither is wired into the public client. Releasing with this state ships a version where a significant portion of the advertised changelog simply doesn't work.

src/roe/api/agents.py (missing retrieve_artifact), src/roe/api/_generated_registry.py and src/roe/client.py (missing KnowledgeBaseAPI registration and property)

Important Files Changed

Filename	Overview
src/roe/api/agents.py	Unchanged in this PR, but the new retrieve_artifact endpoint is documented and expected here — the missing wrapper method means the feature is broken at the public API layer.
src/roe/api/_generated_registry.py	Unchanged, but KnowledgeBaseAPI is absent from the registry and no corresponding wrapper class was added, leaving all documented KB endpoints inaccessible.
openapi/wrappers.yml	Adds retrieve_artifact operation (path param named job_id) and the full knowledge_base API block (13 manual operations); job_id vs agent_job_id naming mismatch exists for the artifact endpoint.
src/roe/_generated/api/agents/agents_jobs_artifacts_result_retrieve.py	New generated endpoint for fetching tool-result artifacts; uses agent_job_id parameter internally, inconsistent with wrapper config's job_id.
src/roe/_generated/api/agents/agents_jobs_cancel_all_create.py	Updated to handle 200 response with AgentJobCancelAllResponse body instead of 204 no-content; public wrapper is unaffected since it discards the return value.
src/roe/_generated/api/knowledge_base/knowledge_base_create.py	New generated endpoint for creating a knowledge base; well-structured with sync/async variants and proper request body handling.
src/roe/_generated/models/knowledge_base.py	New model with full serialization/deserialization including datetime parsing via isoparse; looks correct.
src/roe/_generated/models/draft.py	New model for atlas draft with optional pending_proposal and camelCase ↔ snake_case mapping; deserialization looks correct.
SDK_EXAMPLES.md	Documents both retrieve_artifact and the entire Knowledge Base API, but neither is actually accessible yet — the example code raises AttributeError.
pyproject.toml	Version bumped from 1.1.1 to 1.1.2 as expected for this release.

Flowchart

%%{init: {'theme': 'neutral'}}%%
flowchart TD
    Client["RoeClient"] --> AgentsAPI
    Client -.->|"missing property"| KBmissing["client.knowledge_base ❌"]
    AgentsAPI --> AgentJobsAPI
    AgentJobsAPI --> existing["retrieve_result / cancel / download_reference / ..."]
    AgentJobsAPI -.->|"missing method"| artifactMissing["retrieve_artifact ❌"]
    
    subgraph Generated [Generated low-level code added]
        KB_gen["_generated/api/knowledge_base/* (13 files)"]
        artifact_gen["agents_jobs_artifacts_result_retrieve.py"]
        models["New models: KnowledgeBase, Draft, DraftRef, ..."]
    end

    KBmissing -.-> KB_gen
    artifactMissing -.-> artifact_gen

Loading

%%{init: {'theme': 'base', 'themeVariables': {"darkMode": true, "background": "#0d1117", "primaryColor": "#21262d", "primaryTextColor": "#e6edf3", "primaryBorderColor": "#8b949e", "lineColor": "#8b949e", "textColor": "#e6edf3", "edgeLabelBackground": "#161b22", "actorBkg": "#21262d", "actorBorder": "#8b949e", "actorTextColor": "#e6edf3", "actorLineColor": "#8b949e", "signalColor": "#8b949e", "signalTextColor": "#e6edf3", "noteBkgColor": "#373320", "noteBorderColor": "#d4a72c", "noteTextColor": "#f0e6c0", "labelBoxBkgColor": "#21262d", "labelBoxBorderColor": "#8b949e", "labelTextColor": "#e6edf3", "loopTextColor": "#e6edf3", "activationBkgColor": "#30363d", "activationBorderColor": "#8b949e"}}}%%
flowchart TD
    Client["RoeClient"] --> AgentsAPI
    Client -.->|"missing property"| KBmissing["client.knowledge_base ❌"]
    AgentsAPI --> AgentJobsAPI
    AgentJobsAPI --> existing["retrieve_result / cancel / download_reference / ..."]
    AgentJobsAPI -.->|"missing method"| artifactMissing["retrieve_artifact ❌"]
    
    subgraph Generated [Generated low-level code added]
        KB_gen["_generated/api/knowledge_base/* (13 files)"]
        artifact_gen["agents_jobs_artifacts_result_retrieve.py"]
        models["New models: KnowledgeBase, Draft, DraftRef, ..."]
    end

    KBmissing -.-> KB_gen
    artifactMissing -.-> artifact_gen

Loading

_{Reviews (1): Last reviewed commit: "Release v1.1.2" | Re-trigger Greptile}

[greptile-apps]

Path-parameter name mismatch: job_id vs agent_job_id

The retrieve_artifact operation in wrappers.yml declares the path parameter as name: job_id, but the generated endpoint function (agents_jobs_artifacts_result_retrieve.py) uses agent_job_id as the positional parameter name (to match the {agent_job_id} URL placeholder). The SDK example also uses job_id. When the high-level wrapper is eventually implemented, it will need to translate the public job_id argument to agent_job_id for the generated function — the mismatch is a latent trap if that translation is forgotten.

Note: If this suggestion doesn't match your team's coding style, reply to this and let me know. I'll remember it for next time!