Opdata 3775 add functionality query decimals #4107

Subarna-Singh · 2025-10-14T19:23:20Z

Closes #OPDATA 3775 - Step 1

Description

Add functionality to query decimals from contract and return it as part of the result

Steps to Test

yarn test packages/source/view-function-multi-chain/test

Input

{
  "data": {
      "endpoint": "function",
      "contract": "0x2c1d072e956AFFC0D435Cb7AC38EF18d24d9127c",
  "function": "function latestAnswer() view returns (int256)",
  "network": "ETHEREUM",
  "data": {
        "decimals": {
            "signature": "function decimals() view returns (uint8)"
        }
    }
  }
}

Output

{
    "data": {
        "result": "0x000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000006c5031f8",
        "decimals": "0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000008"
    },
    "statusCode": 200,
    "result": "0x000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000006c5031f8",
    "timestamps": {
        "providerDataRequestedUnixMs": 1760547417551,
        "providerDataReceivedUnixMs": 1760547421541
    },
    "meta": {
        "adapterName": "VIEW_FUNCTION_MULTI_CHAIN",
        "metrics": {
            "feedId": "{\"signature\":\"function latestanswer() view returns (int256)\",\"address\":\"0x2c1d072e956affc0d435cb7ac38ef18d24d9127c\",\"inputParams\":[],\"network\":\"ethereum\",\"data\":{\"decimals\":{\"signature\":\"function decimals() view returns (uint8)\"}}}"
        }
    }
}

Quality Assurance

If a new adapter was made, or an existing one was modified so that its environment variables have changed, update the relevant infra-k8s configuration file.
If a new adapter was made, or an existing one was modified so that its environment variables have changed, update the relevant adapter-secrets configuration file or update the soak testing blacklist.
If a new adapter was made, or a new endpoint was added, update the test-payload.json file with relevant requests.
The branch naming follows git flow (feature/x, chore/x, release/x, hotfix/x, fix/x) or is created from Jira.
This is related to a maximum of one Jira story or GitHub issue.
Types are safe (avoid TypeScript/TSLint features like any and disable, instead use more specific types).
All code changes have 100% unit and integration test coverage. If testing is not applicable or too difficult to justify doing, the reasoning should be documented explicitly in the PR.

changeset-bot · 2025-10-14T19:23:25Z

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: a3eece4

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 3 packages

Name	Type
@chainlink/view-function-multi-chain-adapter	Minor
@chainlink/proof-of-reserves-adapter	Patch
@chainlink/renvm-address-set-adapter	Patch

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

mxiao-cll · 2025-10-14T20:13:32Z

This is not really a good idea because we are trying to inject some contract specific logic into a generic piece of code.

@mmcallister-cll @dskloetc Any ideas on how we should do this? Maybe put the decimal abi into input and have a result2 in output?

mmcallister-cll · 2025-10-14T20:41:33Z

Yeah, agree with @mxiao-cll, we shouldn't call this for every base function call, we can't guarantee every contract will have decimals

My initial ideas are:

(Preferred) what's wrong with doing multiple queries where this is called ie: Promise.all([value, decimals])
or a separate endpoint eg:

{
  "endpoint": "function-with-decimals"
...
}

or even some sort of extension that allows for an ordered array of multiple signature inputs that outputs an ordered array of results

dskloetc · 2025-10-15T06:59:35Z

or even some sort of extension that allows for an ordered array of multiple signature inputs that outputs an ordered array of results

My preference is closest to this. But I would suggest a record/map where the results are returned under the same keys as the inputs. So the input could be something like:

  "data": {
    "endpoint": "function",
    "signature": "function latestAnswer() view returns (int256)",
    "address": "0x779877A7B0D9E8603169DdbD7836e478b4624789",
    "network": "ETHEREUM_GOERLI",
    "data": {
      "decimals": {
        "signature": "function decimals() view returns (int256)",
        "address": "0x779877A7B0D9E8603169DdbD7836e478b4624789",
      }
    }
  }

And then the result would be of the shape:

{
  result: "123456"
  data: {
    decimals: 18
  }
}

But we could put anything else in data and it would be mapped to the corresponding name.
Perhaps address is optional and it would reuse the address from the base request if not specified.

However, I can also see how it would be beneficial to have the decimals for free on all requests without having to change the input. But making a request that is expected to fail is a bit ugly. Do we know how many of the contracts we call do not have a decimals function? Maybe we can check what's currently in RDD?

Subarna-Singh · 2025-10-15T08:03:27Z

or even some sort of extension that allows for an ordered array of multiple signature inputs that outputs an ordered array of results

My preference is closest to this. But I would suggest a record/map where the results are returned under the same keys as the inputs. So the input could be something like:
  "data": {
    "endpoint": "function",
    "signature": "function latestAnswer() view returns (int256)",
    "address": "0x779877A7B0D9E8603169DdbD7836e478b4624789",
    "network": "ETHEREUM_GOERLI",
    "data": {
      "decimals": {
        "signature": "function decimals() view returns (int256)",
        "address": "0x779877A7B0D9E8603169DdbD7836e478b4624789",
      }
    }
  }
And then the result would be of the shape:
{
  result: "123456"
  data: {
    decimals: 18
  }
}
But we could put anything else in data and it would be mapped to the corresponding name. Perhaps address is optional and it would reuse the address from the base request if not specified.

However, I can also see how it would be beneficial to have the decimals for free on all requests without having to change the input. But making a request that is expected to fail is a bit ugly. Do we know how many of the contracts we call do not have a decimals function? Maybe we can check what's currently in RDD?

Contracts in RDD that do not support decimals()

mxiao-cll · 2025-10-15T17:00:32Z

packages/sources/view-function-multi-chain/src/endpoint/function.ts

+  data: {
+    description: 'Optional map of function calls',
+    type: 'object' as unknown as Record<string, any>,
+    required: false,
+  },


data seems to be very generic name, maybe additionalRequests?

Also it is possible to type this correctly without using any

I suggested data because in the response these fields would also appear in data.
additionalRequests is also fine.

mxiao-cll · 2025-10-15T17:02:11Z

packages/sources/view-function-multi-chain/src/transport/function-common.ts

-    const { address, signature, inputParams, network } = param
+    const { address, signature, inputParams, network, data } = param
+
+    const mainResult = await this._executeFunction({


You can run these two in parallel

mxiao-cll · 2025-10-15T17:05:28Z

packages/sources/view-function-multi-chain/src/transport/function-common.ts

+  }
+
+  private async _processNestedDataRequest(
+    data: Record<string, unknown> | undefined,


Should this be typed as Record<string, RequestParams>

mxiao-cll · 2025-10-15T17:07:27Z

packages/sources/view-function-multi-chain/src/transport/function-common.ts

+  ): Promise<Record<string, any>> {
+    if (!data || typeof data !== 'object') return {}
+
+    const results: Record<string, any> = {}


Can we not use any here?

mxiao-cll · 2025-10-15T17:07:35Z

packages/sources/view-function-multi-chain/src/transport/function-common.ts

+          resultField: req.resultField,
+        }
+
+        const subRes = await this._executeFunction(nestedParam)


Can we run these in parallel?

mxiao-cll · 2025-10-15T17:08:15Z

packages/sources/view-function-multi-chain/test/integration/adapter.test.ts

+      expect(response.json()).toMatchSnapshot()
+    })
+
+    it('should return success with additional data requests ', async () => {


Duplicated test case?

Subarna-Singh added 2 commits October 15, 2025 00:50

OPDATA-3775 view-function-multi-chain add functionality

2f3d47a

add changeset

326db4c

Subarna-Singh requested a review from mxiao-cll October 14, 2025 19:23

Merge branch 'main' into OPDATA-3775-add-functionality-query-decimals

032b30e

mxiao-cll requested review from dskloetc and mmcallister-cll October 14, 2025 20:12

Subarna-Singh added 4 commits October 15, 2025 20:38

add functionality to support call to additional contract functions

83b5554

update test-payload

498693d

Merge branch 'main' into OPDATA-3775-add-functionality-query-decimals

5cd2836

remove hard coded decimals field

a3eece4

mxiao-cll reviewed Oct 15, 2025

View reviewed changes

Opdata 3775 add functionality query decimals #4107

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Opdata 3775 add functionality query decimals #4107

Uh oh!

Conversation

Subarna-Singh commented Oct 14, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Closes #OPDATA 3775 - Step 1

Description

Steps to Test

Input

Output

Quality Assurance

Uh oh!

changeset-bot bot commented Oct 14, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

🦋 Changeset detected

Uh oh!

mxiao-cll commented Oct 14, 2025

Uh oh!

mmcallister-cll commented Oct 14, 2025

Uh oh!

dskloetc commented Oct 15, 2025

Uh oh!

Subarna-Singh commented Oct 15, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mxiao-cll Oct 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dskloetc Oct 15, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mxiao-cll Oct 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mxiao-cll Oct 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mxiao-cll Oct 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mxiao-cll Oct 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mxiao-cll Oct 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

Subarna-Singh commented Oct 14, 2025 •

edited

Loading

changeset-bot bot commented Oct 14, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Subarna-Singh commented Oct 15, 2025 •

edited

Loading

dskloetc Oct 15, 2025 •

edited

Loading