chore: sync openapi.json with upstream API

[devin-ai-integration]

Summary

Syncs openapi.json with the upstream API at https://api.detail.dev/public/v1/openapi.json using cargo xtask generate-openapi.

Changes from upstream:

• New asanaStateName field added to BugReview properties
• "asana" added to the integration source enum

The API client is generated at compile time via progenitor::generate_api!, so no other file changes are needed.

Review & Testing Checklist for Human

• Verify the new asanaStateName field and asana enum value are expected upstream additions

Notes

Generated via cargo xtask generate-openapi. All checks pass: cargo xtask check, cargo fmt --check, cargo clippy -- -D warnings, cargo test (295 tests).

Link to Devin session: https://app.devin.ai/sessions/cea71513bc1840c69f62012799a35cb1
Requested by: @sachiniyer

---

---

Summary by cubic

Synced openapi.json with the upstream API at https://api.detail.dev/public/v1/openapi.json. Adds BugReview.asanaStateName and asana to the integration source enum; the client updates at build via progenitor::generate_api!.

^{Written for commit 2d08e8a. Summary will update on new commits. Review in cubic}

[devin-ai-integration]

Original prompt from Sachin

Can you sync up the openapi schema with teh remote. Basically just update with xtasks

[devin-ai-integration]

🤖 Devin AI Engineer

I'll be helping with this pull request! Here's what you should know:

✅ I will automatically:

• Address comments on this PR. Add '(aside)' to your comment to have me ignore it.
• Look at CI failures and help fix them

Note: I can only respond to comments from users who have write access to this repository.

⚙️ Control Options:

• Disable automatic comment and CI monitoring

[devin-ai-integration]

Devin Review found 1 potential issue.

[devin-ai-integration]

📝 Info: BugSource not re-exported — new variant has no downstream impact

The BugSource type is notably absent from the re-export list at src/api/types.rs:7-12. It exists only as a field type within BugReview.source (which is itself optional). No code in the repository pattern-matches on BugSource variants, so adding "asana" is purely additive with zero risk of breaking existing match arms. If a future PR needs to display the source (e.g., in a card view), it would need to handle the new variant at that point.

---

Was this helpful? React with 👍 or 👎 to provide feedback.