I need to confirm deleting a task from a button event. For this reason, I want Alexa to ask for confirmation, and therefore I need to generate a DeleteTaskIntent from my code.
I have tried this:
return handlerInput.responseBuilder.addDelegateDirective({
name: 'DeleteTaskIntent',
confirmationStatus: 'NONE',
slots: {
idTask:{
name: 'idTask',
value: idTask,
confirmationStatus: 'NONE'
}
}
}).getResponse();
In my TouchEventHandler, but after checking the request in the requestEnvelope, I see this:
request: {
type: 'System.ExceptionEncountered',
requestId: 'amzn1.echo-api.request.9c2cf5f4-2f2c-419c-898c-05bd5f096810',
timestamp: '2022-02-23T11:30:08Z',
locale: 'es-ES',
error: {
type: 'INVALID_RESPONSE',
message: 'Directive "Dialog.Delegate" cannot be used in response to an event'
},
cause: {
requestId: 'amzn1.echo-api.request.0494d80d-c6ac-41d6-b3a2-dffd97f427b5'
}
}
And the error
{
"name": "AskSdk.GenericRequestDispatcher Error"
}
also appears, which suggests that no handler can handle this case.
Any idea about what I'm doing wrong when trying to generate the Intent?
Related
I'm currently trying to deploy a function via the console. I have added variables, package specs, and service account credentials.
When I hit deploy, the status was in build with the spinning wheel for about ten minutes before coming back with a build failed icon.
When I went to the logs I am seeing the following:
status: {
code: 8
message: "Build failed: Too many concurrent builds, please stagger your deployments."
}
with severity: ERROR under resource.
There are several other cloud functions that are already deployed and active; they were deployed some time ago and are not currently being redeployed.
I have attempted to redeploy the function in question but that resulted in a timeout after 60 seconds.
Full logs below:
{
protoPayload: {
#type: "type.googleapis.com/google.cloud.audit.AuditLog"
status: {
code: 8
message: "Build failed: Too many concurrent builds, please stagger your deployments."
}
authenticationInfo: {
principalEmail: "user#user"
}
serviceName: "cloudfunctions.googleapis.com"
methodName: "google.cloud.functions.v1.CloudFunctionsService.CreateFunction"
resourceName: "projects/resource_name"
}
insertId: "-n11hqacqvq"
resource: {
type: "cloud_function"
labels: {3}
}
timestamp: "2021-02-18T22:16:56.681559Z"
severity: "ERROR"
logName: "projects/.../logs/cloudaudit.googleapis.com%2Factivity"
operation: {
id: "operations/..."
producer: "cloudfunctions.googleapis.com"
last: true
}
receiveTimestamp: "2021-02-18T22:16:56.858611526Z"
}
I am trying to build a YouTube entertainment app using Google Assistant, following this tutorial: here. I have followed every step precisely, copying code verbatim, but when I run the test, I get this error:
MalformedResponse Failed to parse Dialogflow response into AppResponse because of invalid platform response: Could not find a RichResponse or SystemIntent in the platform response for agentId: ~~ and intentId: ~~. WebhookStatus: code: 2 message: "Webhook call failed. Error: UNKNOWN." ..
I'm not really well versed in DialogFlow, so I'm not sure what's happening. If anyone has any advice, I'd really appreciate it!
Edit: So, here's what happens that triggers the error. I follow the tutorial all the way to the end. I run the test and type in their test request 'rahman'. The response I get back from the test is the above error. I'm not sure what other details I can add, but if there's anything else I can provide, please let me know!
Edit 2: Following the next comment I received, I opened the cloud functions up in the GCP console and found that a new function was made called dialogflowFirebaseFulfillment. I checked the logs for the 'youtube' function I made, and found this notification:
{
insertId: "..."
labels: {
execution_id: ""
}
logName: "projects/<name of project>/logs/cloudfunctions.googleapis.com%2Fcloud-functions"
receiveTimestamp: "<time>"
resource: {
labels: {…}
type: "cloud_function"
}
severity: "ERROR"
textPayload: "Warning, estimating Firebase Config based on GCLOUD_PROJECT. Intializing firebase-admin may fail"
timestamp: "<time>"
}
I then checked out the new function that was made without me knowing and saw it didn't deploy, having an error: "Function failed on loading user code. Error message: Node.js module defined by file index.js is expected to export function named dialogflowFirebaseFulfillment". I checked the logs and found this:
{
insertId: "<id>"
logName: "projects/<project name>/logs/cloudaudit.googleapis.com%2Factivity"
operation: {
id: "operations/<id>"
last: true
producer: "cloudfunctions.googleapis.com"
}
protoPayload: {
#type: "type.googleapis.com/google.cloud.audit.AuditLog"
authenticationInfo: {
principalEmail: "<email>"
}
methodName: "google.cloud.functions.v1.CloudFunctionsService.UpdateFunction"
requestMetadata: {
destinationAttributes: {
}
requestAttributes: {
}
}
resourceName: "projects/<project name>/locations/us-central1/functions/dialogflowFirebaseFulfillment"
serviceName: "cloudfunctions.googleapis.com"
status: {
code: 3
message: "INVALID_ARGUMENT"
}
}
receiveTimestamp: "<time>"
resource: {
labels: {…}
type: "cloud_function"
}
severity: "ERROR"
timestamp: "<time>"
I know this isn't a good sign, but I also don't know how to really interpret where I should go fix the error. Any ideas would be appreciated, thanks!
I have a basic controller setup:
#Controller('')
export class AController {
#Get(':id')
async getThing(#Param('id', ParseUUIDPipe) id: string): Promise<RegisterRead[] | IntervalRead[]> {
return id
}
}
And I get the following error:
{
"statusCode": 400,
"error": "Bad Request",
"message": "Validation failed (uuid vundefined is expected)"
}
Also see: https://github.com/nestjs/nest/issues/2960
This issue was caused because I did not have a version specified. It shows version as an optional field, but it appears to be required:
new ParseUUIDPipe({version: '4'})
I'm using eslint-plugin-mocha to put some rules on writing tests with mocha and here is what my .eslintrc.js file looks like
module.exports = {
root: true,
parserOptions: {
sourceType: 'module'
},
plugins: ['mocha'],
extends: 'plugin:mocha/recommended',
rules: {
'mocha/valid-test-description': ['error', /^should/]
},
env: {
'mocha': true
}
}
This rule finds any test description that doesn't start with should.
The error message looks like that
error Invalid "it()" description found mocha/valid-test-description
I'd like the change this error message to be more descriptive but the rule doesn't offer options to change this message. Do you know how with eslint to configure this ?
I've made a PR and this feature is available since version 6.1.0 of eslint-plugin-mocha.
Here is how to define the error message:
rules: {
'mocha/valid-test-description': ['error', { pattern: /^should/, message: 'Should start with "should"' }]
}
// OR
rules: {
'mocha/valid-test-description': ['error', /^should/, ['it', 'specify', 'test'], 'Should start with "should"']
}
The documentation is available here.
Now the error message is:
error Should start with "should" mocha/valid-test-description
Note: the same feature is available for the valid-suite-description rule.
I am working through the tutorial where it says how to create a contract.
Here is their code:
function createFirstPing() {
const request = {
commands: {
applicationId: 'PingPongApp',
workflowId: `Ping-${sender}`,
commandId: uuidv4(),
ledgerEffectiveTime: { seconds: 0, nanoseconds: 0 },
maximumRecordTime: { seconds: 5, nanoseconds: 0 },
party: sender,
list: [
{
create: {
templateId: PING,
arguments: {
fields: {
sender: { party: sender },
receiver: { party: receiver },
count: { int64: 0 }
}
}
}
}
]
}
};
client.commandClient.submitAndWait(request, (error, _) => {
if (error) throw error;
console.log(`Created Ping contract from ${sender} to ${receiver}.`);
});
}
I want to create a similar request for in my project that sends a field called 'datetime_added'. In my DAML code it is of type time. I cannot figure out the proper syntax for this request. For example:
arguments: {
fields: {
sender: { party: sender },
receiver: { party: receiver },
count: { int64: 0 },
datetime_added: { time: '2019 Feb 19 00 00 00' }
}
}
The format I am expressing the time is not what is causing the problem (although I acknowledge that it's also probably wrong). The error I'm seeing is the following:
Error: ! Validation error
▸ commands
▸ list
▸ 0
▸ create
▸ arguments
▸ fields
▸ datetime_added
✗ Unexpected key time found
at CommandClient.exports.SimpleReporter [as reporter] (/home/vantage/damlprojects/loaner_car/node_modules/#da/daml-ledger/lib/data/reporting/simple_reporter.js:36:12)
at Immediate.<anonymous> (/home/vantage/damlprojects/loaner_car/node_modules/#da/daml-ledger/lib/data/client/command_client.js:52:62)
at runCallback (timers.js:705:18)
at tryOnImmediate (timers.js:676:5)
at processImmediate (timers.js:658:5)
I don't understand, is time not a valid DAML data type?
Edit
I tried switching time to timestamp as follows
datetime_added: {timestamp: { seconds: 0, nanoseconds: 0 }}
causing the following error:
/home/......../damlprojects/car/node_modules/google-protobuf/google-protobuf.js:98
goog.string.splitLimit=function(a,b,c){a=a.split(b);for(var d=[];0<c&&a.length;)d.push(a.shift()),c--;a.length&&d.push(a.join(b));return d};goog.string.editDistance=function(a,b){var c=[],d=[];if(a==b)return 0;if(!a.length||!b.length)return Math.max(a.length,b.length);for(var e=0;e<b.length+1;e++)c[e]=e;for(e=0;e<a.length;e++){d[0]=e+1;for(var f=0;f<b.length;f++)d[f+1]=Math.min(d[f]+1,c[f+1]+1,c[f]+Number(a[e]!=b[f]));for(f=0;f<c.length;f++)c[f]=d[f]}return d[b.length]};goog.asserts={};goog.asserts.ENABLE_ASSERTS=goog.DEBUG;goog.asserts.AssertionError=function(a,b){b.unshift(a);goog.debug.Error.call(this,goog.string.subs.apply(null,b));b.shift();this.messagePattern=a};goog.inherits(goog.asserts.AssertionError,goog.debug.Error);goog.asserts.AssertionError.prototype.name="AssertionError";goog.asserts.DEFAULT_ERROR_HANDLER=function(a){throw a;};goog.asserts.errorHandler_=goog.asserts.DEFAULT_ERROR_HANDLER;
AssertionError: Assertion failed
at new goog.asserts.AssertionError (/home/vantage/damlprojects/loaner_car/node_modules/google-protobuf/google-protobuf.js:98:603)
at Object.goog.asserts.doAssertFailure_ (/home/vantage/damlprojects/loaner_car/node_modules/google-protobuf/google-protobuf.js:99:126)
at Object.goog.asserts.assert (/home/vantage/damlprojects/loaner_car/node_modules/google-protobuf/google-protobuf.js:99:385)
at jspb.BinaryWriter.writeSfixed64 (/home/vantage/damlprojects/loaner_car/node_modules/google-protobuf/google-protobuf.js:338:80)
at proto.com.digitalasset.ledger.api.v1.Value.serializeBinaryToWriter (/home/vantage/damlprojects/loaner_car/node_modules/#da/daml-ledger/lib/grpc/generated/com/digitalasset/ledger/api/v1/value_pb.js:289:12)
at jspb.BinaryWriter.writeMessage (/home/vantage/damlprojects/loaner_car/node_modules/google-protobuf/google-protobuf.js:341:342)
at proto.com.digitalasset.ledger.api.v1.RecordField.serializeBinaryToWriter (/home/vantage/damlprojects/loaner_car/node_modules/#da/daml-ledger/lib/grpc/generated/com/digitalasset/ledger/api/v1/value_pb.js:1024:12)
at jspb.BinaryWriter.writeRepeatedMessage (/home/vantage/damlprojects/loaner_car/node_modules/google-protobuf/google-protobuf.js:350:385)
at proto.com.digitalasset.ledger.api.v1.Record.serializeBinaryToWriter (/home/vantage/damlprojects/loaner_car/node_modules/#da/daml-ledger/lib/grpc/generated/com/digitalasset/ledger/api/v1/value_pb.js:822:12)
at jspb.BinaryWriter.writeMessage (/home/vantage/damlprojects/loaner_car/node_modules/google-protobuf/google-protobuf.js:341:342)
In short, I need to know what type to use in my Node.js client for a DAML value of type time and how to express it.
I would recommend using the reference documentation for the bindings (although, as of version 0.4.0, browsing through it to answer your question I noticed two mistakes). In the upper navigation bar of the page you can start from Classes > data.CommandClient and work your way down its only argument (SubmitAndWaitRequest) until, following the links to the different fields, you reach the documentation for the timestamp field, which, as the error suggests (despite the mistake in the documentation), should be a Timestamp, where seconds are expressed in epoch time (seconds since 1970).
Hence, to make the call you wanted this would be the shape of the object you ought to send:
arguments: {
fields: {
sender: { party: sender },
receiver: { party: receiver },
count: { int64: 0 }
datetime_added: { timestamp: { seconds: 0, nanoseconds: 0 } }
}
}
For your case in particular, I would probably make a small helper that uses the Date.parse function.
function parseTimestamp(string) {
return { seconds: Date.parse(string) / 1000, nanoseconds: 0 };
}
That you can then use to pass in the time you mentioned in the example you made:
arguments: {
fields: {
sender: { party: sender },
receiver: { party: receiver },
count: { int64: 0 }
datetime_added: { timestamp: parseTimestamp('2019-02-19') }
}
}
As a closing note, I'd like to add that the Node.js bindings ship with typing files that provide auto-completion and contextual help on compatible editors (like Visual Studio Code). Using those will probably help you. Since the bindings are written in TypeScript, the typings are guaranteed to be always up to date with the API. Note that for the time being, the auto-completion works for the Ledger API itself but won't give you help for arbitrary records that target your DAML model (the fields object in this case).