[david-ruiz-cko]

Summary

Security hardening: input validation for request paths. Reported internally.

Changes

• checkout_sdk/client.py: input validation and encoding in the shared path builder (build_path); docstring added.
• checkout_sdk/payments/sessions/sessions_client.py, checkout_sdk/events/events_client.py: request building moved to the shared helpers.
• checkout_sdk/apm/sepa_client.py, checkout_sdk/payments/googlepay/googlepay_client.py, checkout_sdk/instruments/instruments_client.py: path constants refactored into single segments; request paths unchanged.
• README.md: "Exception handling" documents how identifiers are handled.
• tests/client_test.py: new; path segment encoding and validation tests.
• tests/compliancerequests/compliance_requests_client_test.py: expects CheckoutArgumentException for a None identifier.

API Reference

None. No operation or schema change; request paths for valid identifiers are unchanged.

Breaking changes

• Client methods raise CheckoutArgumentException before sending when an identifier is not a valid path segment, for example None or empty (None previously raised TypeError). Migration: pass identifiers as returned by the API.
• Identifiers are encoded by the SDK, so an identifier that is already encoded is encoded again. Migration: pass identifiers unencoded.
• Client.build_path treats each argument as one path segment. Migration: pass each segment as its own argument.

Tests

• Existing tests pass
• Serialization tests cover every new or changed property (no request or response type changed)
• README updated if documented usage changed

Unit tests added; pytest and flake8 pass.

Related

None.

[agent-wall-e]

🟡 Risk Classification: MINOR

Approval route: AI Review + Human Approval
Rollback controls: Staged rollout + rollback

Classification reasons

• no_low_class_matched
• prod_source_modified

Operational gates

• ✅ jira_ticket (UTF-8)
• ✅ independent_review

Files analysed: 1

---

_{wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · policy 6b4ce2b3b45a…}

[agent-wall-e]

🔬 Debug — why this classification?

Each reason code emitted by the classifier, its source clause in the AI in SDLC Control Framework, and what it means.

Reason code	Kind	Clause	Meaning
no_low_class_matched	informational	§2.2 (fall-through)	None of the deterministic Low classes (§2.2.3, §2.2.4, §2.2.7, docs-only) applied; classifier fell through to LLM evaluation.
prod_source_modified	informational	§2.1 M7 (informational)	At least one file is non-doc, non-test, non-IaC — i.e. application source code was modified.

Kinds:

• classifying — this rule contributed to the chosen tier.
• informational — context only; did not by itself decide the tier.

See issue #3 for the proposal to formalise this map as Appendix A of the standards doc.

_{wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · debug}

[agent-wall-e]

🟢 Advisory review: Looks good to me

This PR still needs a human approval — wall-e cannot auto-approve it. For what it's worth, I read the diff and found nothing I'd block on.

This diff only bumps the version string from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1; all the substantive changes described in the PR body are in Ruby files not present in this diff.

What I checked

• The diff is a single-line version bump in properties.py, which matches a patch release increment.
• The PR description references extensive Ruby source and spec changes (checkout_utils.rb, client.rb, several client files, README.md, and new/updated specs) that are not visible in this diff — the review is therefore necessarily limited to the version bump only.
• The version number 4.9.1 is consistent with a patch/security release following 4.9.0.

---

_{This is not an approval. wall-e cannot auto-approve this PR — it is an opinion to help whoever does. Advisory review · us.anthropic.claude-sonnet-4-6 · wall-e 2026.06.19-02}

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud