Document activity_type field on Tour schema - #121
Merged
Conversation
The GET /tours response returns an activity_type field (passed through from the Search service), but it was never documented in the public Partner API spec. Partners integrating against /tours were seeing undocumented values such as privateTour and multiDayTrip. Add activity_type to the Tour schema as a descriptive string with the common values documented and an example. It is intentionally NOT modelled as an enum: the value set is not closed upstream, so an enum would falsely imply a fixed set and could break partner codegen when new values are introduced. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
clue-gyg
approved these changes
Aug 13, 2026
clue-gyg
left a comment
clue-gyg
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
✅ Auto-approved as trivial change
Documentation-only change adding a description for an already-existing (but previously undocumented) field in the OpenAPI spec; 20 lines added, no deletions, no behavioral or schema-contract change (it just documents a field partners already receive), well under the size limit.
arihantgupta-28
approved these changes
Aug 13, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What & why
https://getyourguide.slack.com/archives/C0AN9US9PFC/p1786613300301489
An APAC partner testing
GET /tourshit anactivity_typefield in the response (values seen:privateTour,multiDayTrip) that isn't documented anywhere in the public Partner API spec. The field has been returned for a while — it's passed through from the upstream Search service — but was never published, so partners can't build against it with confidence.This PR documents
activity_typeon theTourschema with the common values and an example.Notes on modelling
string, not anenum. The value set is not closed upstream: even the Search source-of-truth spec (search.master.delivery) models the activity type key as a freestring, and new values can appear over time. Anenumwould falsely imply a fixed set and could break partner-generated clients when a new value shows up.Badge.typebestseller-<activityType>entries, plustransferobserved in Search data). The description explicitly tells integrators to tolerate unrecognised values.example: entryTicketmatches the example already used for this field in the internal service spec.Verification
Ran the same client generation CI performs:
npx @openapitools/openapi-generator-cli generate -i spec/api.yaml -g typescript-node -o /tmp/...— succeeds, and the generatedTourmodel now includesactivityType?: string.🤖 Generated with Claude Code