release: 0.1.0

[stainless-app]

Automated Release PR

0.1.0 (2026-01-02)

Full Changelog: v0.0.20...v0.1.0

Features

• api: api update (7b79b5e)
• api: api update (6b01cd6)
• api: api update (f6a40eb)
• api: api update (131ef7d)
• api: api update (789ca6d)
• api: api update (d165256)
• api: api update (fe37424)
• api: api update (43788a0)
• api: api update (72d8b00)

Bug Fixes

• calling break out of streams should be instantaneous (7503ef5)
• issue where json.parse errors when receiving HTTP 204 with nobody (919e4e1)

---

This pull request is managed by Stainless's GitHub App.

The semver version number is based on included commit messages. Alternatively, you can manually set the version number in the title of this pull request.

For a better experience, it is recommended to use either rebase-merge or squash-merge when merging this pull request.

🔗 Stainless website
📚 Read the docs
🙋 Reach out for help or questions

[sentry]

Bug: The change from required to optional for company_id and member_id lacks validation to ensure either one (but not both) is provided, allowing invalid API requests.
_{Severity: CRITICAL | Confidence: High}

🔍 Detailed Analysis

The PaymentMethodRetrieveParams and PaymentMethodListParams models now define company_id and member_id as optional, with documentation stating they are mutually exclusive. However, no validation logic was added to enforce this constraint. The underlying BaseModel does not support cross-field validation. This allows the SDK to accept parameter objects that are invalid in two ways: 1) with neither company_id nor member_id set, or 2) with both set. In both cases, the SDK will serialize the parameters without error, but the subsequent API call will fail with a validation error from the server. This is a regression from the previous behavior where member_id was required.

💡 Suggested Fix

Implement a custom validation method within the PaymentMethodRetrieveParams and PaymentMethodListParams models. This method should check that exactly one of company_id or member_id is present. Raise an ArgumentError if the condition is not met to provide immediate feedback to the developer.

🤖 Prompt for AI Agent

Review the code at the location below. A potential bug has been identified by an AI
agent.
Verify if this is a real issue. If it is, propose a fix; if not, explain why it's not
valid.

Location: lib/whop_sdk/models/payment_method_retrieve_params.rb#L14-L20

Potential issue: The `PaymentMethodRetrieveParams` and `PaymentMethodListParams` models
now define `company_id` and `member_id` as `optional`, with documentation stating they
are mutually exclusive. However, no validation logic was added to enforce this
constraint. The underlying `BaseModel` does not support cross-field validation. This
allows the SDK to accept parameter objects that are invalid in two ways: 1) with neither
`company_id` nor `member_id` set, or 2) with both set. In both cases, the SDK will
serialize the parameters without error, but the subsequent API call will fail with a
validation error from the server. This is a regression from the previous behavior where
`member_id` was required.

_{Did we get this right? 👍 / 👎 to inform future reviews.
Reference ID: 8110442}