Skip to content

docs(drift): draft from internal source - #379

Merged
ipeleg merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs-drift/src-f52cab62eb-81efae5
Jul 28, 2026
Merged

docs(drift): draft from internal source#379
ipeleg merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs-drift/src-f52cab62eb-81efae5

Conversation

@pedromcunha

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Drafted from an internal source repo, requested by @ipeleg.

This PR was auto-generated by the reusable-docs-draft-pr workflow from a Claude-drafted update in the source repo. It is opened as a draft — please review, edit as needed, and mark ready for review before merging.

Review checklist

  • Content matches the behavior shipped in the source PR
  • No internal-only details (service names, file paths, unreleased names, security internals) leaked into the draft
  • Conforms to CLAUDE.md style rules
  • Cross-references and internal links resolve
  • Any Needs human input items from the source comment are addressed

Generated by reusable-docs-draft-pr.yml in relayprotocol/agents-config.

Requested by @ipeleg via /publish-docs-pr
@mintlify

mintlify Bot commented Jul 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Preview deployment for your docs. Learn more about Mintlify Previews.

Project Status Preview Updated (UTC)
unevenlabs 🟢 Ready View Preview Jul 28, 2026, 12:53 PM

💡 Tip: Enable Workflows to automatically generate PRs for you.

@ipeleg
ipeleg marked this pull request as ready for review July 28, 2026 12:54
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jul 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Claude finished @ipeleg's task in 1m 41s —— View job


Code review — PR #379

  • Gather context (diff, changed files, style guide)
  • Verify anchor links and cross-references resolve
  • Check conformance to AGENTS.md style rules
  • Post review

Small, well-scoped drift PR: one new row + clarifying sentence in references/api/api-keys.mdx, one changelog entry. The anchor [Elevated Rate Limits](/references/api/api-keys#elevated-rate-limits) resolves correctly, the changelog entry is newest-first and matches the §4.5 format, and backtick/bold usage follows §2.9. Nothing here leaks internal details.

Three things I'd fix before merging.


1. "GET /requests/v2 continue at 10 rps" contradicts the documented v2 sunset ramp

references/api/api-keys.mdx:55 and references/api/changelog.mdx:8 both assert flatly that /requests/v2 stays at 10 rps. But references/api/api_guides/migrating-to-requests-v3.mdx:19 documents:

| Sep 1, 2026 onward | v2's rate limit is progressively reduced each month; requests over the limit receive 429. |

So the claim is true today (2026-07-28) and becomes wrong on 2026-09-01, at which point two pages disagree about the same number. Worth qualifying now rather than relying on someone remembering to come back.

Suggested for api-keys.mdx:55:

`/requests` and `/requests/v2` share the 10 rps bucket; `/requests/v3` has its own 20 rps bucket. From September 1, 2026, `/requests/v2`'s limit is progressively reduced each month until it is [retired](/references/api/api_guides/migrating-to-requests-v3#sunset-timeline).

For the changelog line, "GET /requests and GET /requests/v2 continue at 10 rps" → "…remain at 10 rps for now; v2's limit begins ramping down on September 1, 2026." Fix this →

2. The Default Rate Limits table wasn't updated, so /requests/v3's default limit is now undefined

references/api/api-keys.mdx:36-41 still reads:

Endpoint Limit
/requests 200 requests per minute

Before this PR, /requests plausibly covered all versions. Now that the elevated table explicitly splits v3 out into its own row and the prose says the two have separate buckets, a reader can no longer tell whether v3's default limit is the 200 rpm /requests row or the 200 rpm "Other endpoints" row — and if the two ever diverge, the page is silently wrong. The changelog says "Default (non-elevated) limits are unchanged", but the page never states what v3's default limit actually is.

Since GET /requests/v3 is the recommended Requests API and the one that requires a key, its default limit is arguably the most-looked-up number on this page. Add the row (even if it's the same 200 rpm) so both tables have the same shape. Fix this →

3. The /requests row label is a literal prefix of /requests/v3

In the elevated table, /requests (line 51) and /requests/v3 (line 50) sit two rows apart, and /requests reads as if it covers every path under it — including v3. The clarifying sentence on line 55 resolves it, but tables get skimmed and screenshotted without the prose underneath. Label the row for what it means:

| `/requests`, `/requests/v2` | 10 requests per second |

That also lets line 55 shrink to just the v3 half of the point, or drop entirely.


Nits (non-blocking)

  • Row ordering/requests/v3 is inserted above /requests, so the two tables no longer list endpoints in the same order. Cosmetic, but the tables are meant to be read as a pair. Folds into Add sdk method docs #2 if you add the v3 row to the default table.
  • rps vs. requests per secondrps appears three times across the two new lines and nowhere else in the docs; every table on the page spells it out. §2.4 asks for plain English. Minor, but "20 requests per second" costs nothing.
  • Changelog lead is **Added** (changelog.mdx:8) — nothing was added here; an existing limit changed value. The rest of the file uses **Behavior change** for exactly this kind of adjustment (see the 2026-07-27 and 2026-06-19 entries). §4.5 only enumerates Breaking/Deprecated/Added, so this is a judgment call, but **Behavior change** matches established practice in the file.
  • Pre-existing, not from this PRchangelog.mdx:26-27 is missing the blank line before the ## 2026-07-09 heading. Harmless in CommonMark, but inconsistent with every other entry boundary in the file. Easy drive-by fix while you're in there.

I've only reviewed here — no changes pushed. Happy to apply any of the above if you want them; just say which.
· docs-drift/src-f52cab62eb-81efae5

@ipeleg
ipeleg merged commit d654ef0 into main Jul 28, 2026
4 checks passed
@ipeleg
ipeleg deleted the docs-drift/src-f52cab62eb-81efae5 branch July 28, 2026 12:57
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants