Skip to content

Use cases / illustrative scenarios

Where drift changes the outcome.

These scenarios explain policy decisions. They are synthetic examples, never customer incidents or measured recovery results.

Synthetic scenario / 01

A request field is renamed.

A vendor expects payment_method where a tool still sends source. A selective request patch can change that field while preserving unrelated values.

Prerequisites
Authoritative field identity and type evidence, an explicit trusted repair engine, confidence and verification gates, and write policy. Nango codegen separately requires a caller-confirmed same-type sibling rename.
Limitations
The default guest has no selective repair. Shape passthrough may still be rejected by upstream. No automatic retries or write execution.
Review the narrower Nango codegen boundary →

Synthetic scenario / 02

An amount changes units.

A cents-to-dollars shift can change meaning without changing the JSON type. A 200 response does not prove write integrity. Unrepairable semantic writes fail closed in repair and strict modes; observe only records.

Prerequisites
Explicit scoped statistical windows with sufficient baseline/live samples, compatible profiles and precision budgets, or a configured deterministic invariant.
Limitations
No universal conversion or detection guarantee. A response decision cannot undo an already completed write. Meaning changes without an observable signal can remain undetected.
Semantic detection and its limits ↗

Synthetic scenario / 03

A response loses a field.

A read result no longer contains the expected status. Reads always fail open: preserve the original outcome and report available drift evidence. Internal engine faults bypass inspection.

Prerequisites
An explicit detector and baseline, a supported complete capture and configured event listeners. Retained artifacts need opt-in audit capture, host drain and a durable sink.
Limitations
Unknown-length, chunked and non-JSON Fetch bodies skip inspection. Missing evidence is unavailable, not a clean result. No fabricated field values or production recovery claim.
Review tool response constraints →

Decide with the evidence.

Payload verification does not prove write integrity. Show write-integrity evidence separately. Review the original result, dispatch status and idempotency binding before deciding whether to replay a write.

Read the protection and adoption model →