[jeyrb]

I encountered this when trying to make sure Supernotify worked well with Pyscript.

It has its own notify action now, which is much richer than the plain vanilla notify.send_message style to be easier to use from the actions UI. So a more complicated services.yaml, though other integrations might similarly be pushing what the configflow UI can do.

Problem

pyscript.generate_stubs gets the signature wrong for services whose services.yaml uses sections or multiple selectors.

• Sections. fix stub generator dropping additional_fields entries #867 flattened the sections named additional_fields and advanced_fields, but a section can have any name. Any other section becomes a bogus untyped parameter, and the fields inside it are dropped.
• multiple: true. A text, select or entity selector with multiple: true takes a list, but is annotated as a single value, so passing a list is reported as a type error.

For example, a service with a multimedia section and a multiple text field currently generates:

def notify(*, message: str | None=None, delivery: str | None=None, multimedia=None): ...

Change

• A field is treated as a section when it has fields and no selector, whatever its name.
• A selector with multiple: true is annotated as list[...] of its usual type.

The same service now generates:

def notify(*, message: str | None=None, delivery: list[str] | None=None, camera_entity_id: str | None=None, snapshot_url: str | None=None): ...

Testing

Added test_stubs_flatten_named_sections_and_multiple, which fails on master and passes with this change. The existing stub tests still pass.

[craigbarratt]

Thanks for this! Flattening sections and handling multiple selectors are both good improvements. I've left a few inline comments. The main one is the duplicate-parameter case, which can make the generated stub file fail to parse. The list[...] annotation is also stricter than what Home Assistant accepts, which leads to type errors on valid calls.

Also, #867 has since been merged and changes the same section-flattening code in _build_services (advanced_fields → additional_fields), so this will need a rebase onto current master.

[jeyrb]

Thanks for feedback, rebased and addressed

[jeyrb]

Thanks for the review. I've rebased onto current master (including #867) and squashed into a single commit. Each inline comment is addressed in its thread.

[craigbarratt]

Thanks for the quick turnaround! I've checked all the fixes against the code and they look good, and tests/test_stubs.py passes locally. Two small things remain, both easy to fix. Once they're in, I'm happy to merge. I'll handle a few other minor type-annotation edge cases in a follow-up commit after merging.

[craigbarratt]

Thanks for the PR!