docs: document the secure_payment.user_event webhook - #114
Open
rodrigopavezi wants to merge 2 commits into
Open
Conversation
Documents the new payer-funnel webhook emitted by the Secure Payment Page: the three userEvent values (wallet_connected, payment_sent_to_wallet, payment_approved_in_wallet), a payload example, and the field semantics -- notably that occurredAt and properties are client-reported telemetry and that wallet addresses appear only as hashes. Signature verification, delivery headers and retry behaviour are unchanged, so the existing guidance applies as-is.
|
Preview deployment for your docs. Learn more about Mintlify Previews.
💡 Tip: Enable Workflows to automatically generate PRs for you. |
Greptile SummaryThe PR documents the new
Confidence Score: 5/5The PR appears safe to merge after the dependent API implementation ships. No blocking failure remains; the previously reported stale quickstart and reconciliation catalogs now both include Important Files Changed
Reviews (2): Last reviewed commit: "docs: add the new event to the reconcili..." | Re-trigger Greptile |
Both guides present their event lists as complete -- "The 12 events" and "All supported webhook events" -- so leaving them untouched would have told integrators the payer-funnel event does not exist. Adds `secure_payment.user_event` to both tables, bumps the reconciliation heading to 13, and adds a handler case to the reconciliation switch example with an explicit warning not to reconcile money off it: a payer can approve in their wallet and the transaction can still fail on-chain, so payment.confirmed remains the settlement signal.
rodrigopavezi
requested review from
LeoSlrRf,
MantisClone,
aimen74 and
bassgeta
August 6, 2026 01:04
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Part of REQ-291
Documents the new
secure_payment.user_eventwebhook.Implementation: RequestNetwork/request-api#1139 · UI: RequestNetwork/request-secure-payment#550
Merge after the API PR ships, so the docs don't describe an event platforms aren't receiving yet.
What's documented
api-reference/webhooks.mdx— a "Secure Payment Page Events (payer funnel)" section: the event table row, the threeuserEventvalues (wallet_connected,payment_sent_to_wallet,payment_approved_in_wallet), a payload example, and a note on field semanticsapi-features/webhooks-events.mdx— new category row, and the event-type count bumped 12 → 13Signature verification, delivery headers and retry behaviour are unchanged, so the existing guidance on this page applies as-is and isn't restated.
Points worth a reviewer's eye
securePaymentToken,requestId/requestIds,orchestratorId,timestamp) and client-reported telemetry (occurredAt,properties) — integrators should not treatpropertiesas authoritative, since it originates in the payer's browser.Scope is limited to this one event; other currently-undocumented events (
client_id.linked,secure_payment.access_rejected,kyt.screening.completed) are left alone.