feat: PM-KISAN application status in the Grievance plugin [#60] by KrutikaPhirangi · Pull Request #91 · OpenAgriNet/network-adapter

KrutikaPhirangi · 2026-10-23T08:03:20Z

What

PM-KISAN application status in the Grievance plugin, on the SchemeApplication pack. Stacked on #71 (PM-KISAN grievance); review that first. ADRs are in #92.

Action	Upstream	Mapping
`init`	`/ChatbotOTP`	`pmkisan/application-status.init.yaml`
`status`	`/ChatbotOTPVerified`, `/ChatbotUserDetails`, then `/ChatbotBeneficiaryStatus`	`pmkisan/application-status.status.yaml`

Commits

Envelope: aesCbcKeyInBand as a provider's main envelope, verify on the provider's own host, and a follow-up read whose answer is added to the first (absent if it fails). ADR-0005.
Application status: pmkisan-chatbot provider block and binding key, mappings, tests. The farmer is named by enrolmentId or applicant.mobile; the mobile is never echoed. on_status returns only allow-listed fields: enrolmentId, registeredOn, latestInstalmentPaid, ekyc, blockers. No registration is a 400.

Testing

go test ./pkg/plugin/implementation/Grievance/... ./pkg/plugin/implementation/internal/...
End to end against the mock PM-KISAN chatbot in quick-start: init by mobile and by enrolmentId, status with blockers, with none, and no registration.

github-actions · 2026-10-23T08:06:37Z

🛡️ Trivy security scan (CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW)

View full run

Go dependencies

No findings at CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW.

Container image

No findings at CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW.

github-actions · 2026-10-23T08:08:38Z

📊 Test Coverage: ✅ Passed — 81% of changed lines covered, min 80%

manjudr

@KrutikaPhirangi - Please walk through the code, Some part I am unable to understand it.

manjudr · 2026-10-23T08:45:47Z

          - id: Grievance
            config:
-              bindingKeys: "pmfby|openagrinet:Grievance,pmkisan|openagrinet:Grievance"
+              bindingKeys: "pmfby|openagrinet:Grievance,pmkisan|openagrinet:Grievance,pmkisan-chatbot|openagrinet:SchemeApplication"


Why is it a chatbot? Can we keep it as PMKisan only?

manjudr · 2026-10-23T08:58:56Z

+
+// followUp adds a second read's answer under field after a successful call;
+// on failure the field is absent, never empty (ADR-0005).
+type followUp struct {


What does 'follow-up' mean? Why do we need this? And why is this in common directory? any other plugins are depending on it?

Because of the earlier review on #71 asking to move the envelope out of Grievance, and I moved the follow-up along with it.

only the encryption is a fair fit for common, the follow-up isn't. I can move it to Grievance

manjudr · 2026-10-23T09:00:30Z

+	default:
+		// The participant is the OTP service: verify on its host.
+		cbc, onOTPService := e.base.(*cbcCodec)
+		if !onOTPService {
+			return nil, fmt.Errorf("%s: otpVerifyPath needs otpEnvelope, or envelope %s: the OTP is verified on the OTP service",
+				provider, envelopeAESCBCKeyInBand)
+		}
+		e.verify = &verify{provider: provider, path: s.verifyPath, actions: verifyActions, codec: cbc,
+			host: participantHost, hooks: hooks, client: client, budget: model.ActionPlan{TimeoutMs: verifyTimeoutMs}}
+	}
+
+	followUpActions := listSet(s.followUpActions)
+	switch {
+	case s.followUpPath == "" && s.followUpField == "" && len(followUpActions) == 0:
+	case s.followUpPath == "" || s.followUpField == "" || len(followUpActions) == 0:
+		return nil, fmt.Errorf("%s: followUpPath, followUpField and followUpActions are set together or not at all", provider)
+	default:
+		for action := range followUpActions {
+			if e.otpActions[action] && e.otp == nil || !e.otpActions[action] && e.base == nil {
+				return nil, fmt.Errorf("%s: followUpActions names %s, which has no envelope to send a follow-up through", provider, action)
+			}
+		}
+		e.followUp = &followUp{provider: provider, path: s.followUpPath, field: s.followUpField, actions: followUpActions,
+			succeeded: hooks.Succeeded, client: client, budget: model.ActionPlan{TimeoutMs: followUpTimeoutMs}}


I wasn't able to understand this? Why are making it as default? Probably you may need to walkthrough this @KrutikaPhirangi

manjudr · 2026-10-23T09:02:03Z

+
+	"followUpPath":      func(s *envelopeSettings, v string) { s.followUpPath = v },
+	"followUpField":     func(s *envelopeSettings, v string) { s.followUpField = v },
+	"followUpActions":   func(s *envelopeSettings, v string) { s.followUpActions = v },
+	"followUpTimeoutMs": func(s *envelopeSettings, v string) { s.followUpTimeoutMs = v },
 }


What is "followup" What is the use case here?

a second call to PM-KISAN, made automatically after the first one succeeds, whose answer is added to the first.

The use case: PM-KISAN application status needs two calls to the chatbot service:

/ChatbotUserDetails returns the registration: registration number, registration date, instalments paid, eKYC.

/ChatbotBeneficiaryStatus returns what is blocking payment, for example "Income Tax Payee" or "Land Seeding, KYS".

The second call becomes application.blockers in on_status, so the farmer learns why the money isn't coming. A Beckn status maps to one registry call, so the envelope makes the second call itself and passes both answers to the mapping.

manjudr · 2026-10-23T09:02:46Z

+      : $exists($match($d, /^\/Date\([0-9]+([+-][0-9]{4})?\)\/$/)[0])
+        ? $fromMillis($number($split($substring($d, 6), /[^0-9]/)[0]), $istPicture, "+0530")
+      : $exists($match($d, /^[0-9]{1,2}\/[0-9]{1,2}\/[0-9]{4}/)[0])
+        ? (


Why we need this complex extraction logic?

Fair point. The four formats were a guess, because we hadn't seen a real DateOfRegistration I'll check a real staging response and keep only that format, leaving the date out if it doesn't match.

…llow-up read [#60] aesCbcKeyInBand can be a provider's main envelope, and such a provider verifies the challenge on its own host. followUpPath, followUpField and followUpActions make a second read after a successful call and add its answer under followUpField, on its own budget (followUpTimeoutMs); a failed follow-up leaves the field absent.

PM-KISAN application status on the SchemeApplication pack, served by the chatbot service (pmkisan-chatbot): init sends an OTP for an enrolmentId or applicant.mobile; status verifies it, reads /ChatbotUserDetails, then /ChatbotBeneficiaryStatus for what is holding payment up. Only allow-listed fields are returned; the mobile is never echoed. No registration is a 400 BIZ_GENERIC_ERROR.

KrutikaPhirangi force-pushed the feat/60-pmkisan-application-status branch from 8083ade to af4f878 Compare October 23, 2026 08:08

KrutikaPhirangi mentioned this pull request Oct 23, 2026

docs: ADRs for the PM-KISAN grievance and application status [#60] #92

Open

manjudr reviewed Oct 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

manjudr added this pull request to stack #87 October 23, 2026 09:03

KrutikaPhirangi force-pushed the feat/60-pmkisan-application-status branch from af4f878 to 128895b Compare October 23, 2026 10:00

KrutikaPhirangi added 2 commits October 23, 2026 16:09

KrutikaPhirangi force-pushed the feat/60-pmkisan-application-status branch from 128895b to 8c5637c Compare October 23, 2026 10:41

Navigation Menu

Repository navigation

feat: PM-KISAN application status in the Grievance plugin [#60] - #91

feat: PM-KISAN application status in the Grievance plugin [#60]#91
KrutikaPhirangi wants to merge 2 commits into
feat/60-pmkisan-grievancefrom
feat/60-pmkisan-application-status

KrutikaPhirangi commented Oct 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Oct 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Oct 23, 2026

Uh oh!

manjudr left a comment

Uh oh!

manjudr Oct 23, 2026

Uh oh!

manjudr Oct 23, 2026

Uh oh!

KrutikaPhirangi Oct 23, 2026

Uh oh!

manjudr Oct 23, 2026

Uh oh!

KrutikaPhirangi Oct 23, 2026

Uh oh!

manjudr Oct 23, 2026

Uh oh!

KrutikaPhirangi Oct 23, 2026

Uh oh!

manjudr Oct 23, 2026

Uh oh!

KrutikaPhirangi Oct 23, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Uh oh!

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

Conversation

KrutikaPhirangi commented Oct 23, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

What

Commits

Testing

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Oct 23, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

🛡️ Trivy security scan (CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW)

Go dependencies

Container image

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Oct 23, 2026

Uh oh!

manjudr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Uh oh!

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

KrutikaPhirangi commented Oct 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading

github-actions Bot commented Oct 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading