fix: align Bazaar body-discovery remediation copy

[TateLyman]

Summary

• keep the well-known failure remediation variant-aware for body-discovery Bazaar metadata
• avoid telling body-discovery services to add MCP-style name/description fields when the failing fields are info.input/output/schema
• widen the internal read helper return type to match both supported extension variants

Verification

• pnpm vitest run tests/unit/bazaar-well-known.test.ts tests/unit/bazaar-challenge.test.ts tests/unit/bazaar-extensions-bazaar.test.ts
• pnpm typecheck
• pnpm prettier --check "src/bazaar/{well-known,challenge}.ts" tests/unit/bazaar-well-known.test.ts
• git diff --check

[vercel]

@TateLyman is attempting to deploy a commit to the fardinvahdat's projects Team on Vercel.

A member of the Team first needs to authorize it.

[fardinvahdat]

Hi @TateLyman — welcome, and thank you for the contribution.

Audit ✅ — the copy fix is correct and the diff is appropriately scoped.

The PR stayed open through the v0.3.2 ship window because the release branch had already been cut and the audit log threading takes a separate pass for contributor PRs. v0.3.2 just shipped to npm ([email protected], provenance + signed attestations); your PR is the first item on the v0.3.2.1 fast-follow list along with the @tomsmart cdp-mature fixture (dropping in #show-and-tell on Sunday 2026-05-24).

Expected v0.3.2.1 cut: 2026-05-26 ± a day depending on the fixture wire-up complexity. You'll be credited in the CHANGELOG ### Fixed section for v0.3.2.1.

If you have time to engage further, the contributor handbook at CONTRIBUTING.md has the JSON API discipline section that v0.3.2 just added — every JSON-envelope change now needs a snapshot update + CHANGELOG line. Not blocking for this PR (copy fix doesn't touch the envelope), just context for future contributions.

Thanks again — the body-discovery remediation copy was the only stale corner of the human-format output. Fix is clean.

[TateLyman]

Thanks for the fast review and the credit. I’ll keep the no-payment checks scoped to the JSON envelope / body-discovery path, and I’ll re-run against v0.3.2.1 when it ships.

If you want, I can also turn this into a compact launch-readiness note for the contributor handbook so future fixture updates keep the same contract shape. No paid calls or payment headers used.

[fardinvahdat]

Yes please @TateLyman — that handbook contribution is exactly the kind of follow-up that makes the first contribution lead to the second. Scoping suggestion to keep the change focused:

Where it should live: CONTRIBUTING.md (extending the existing "JSON API discipline" section that v0.3.2's X402-44 just added) rather than a new file. Keeps the contributor surface single-source.

What should be in scope:

• The fixture-update contract shape (e.g., when a contributor adds a captured-response fixture, what schema fields are required, where the schema is locked, how the test harness consumes it)
• The body-discovery vs MCP-discovery decision tree from a contributor's lens (you've now touched the body-discovery remediation copy, so you've seen the actual user-facing impact of getting the variant wrong)
• A "no-payment-required test discipline" subsection — your "no paid calls or payment headers used" note from this PR's body is the exact framing that should be normalised for future contributors

What's out of scope (for this contribution — easy to expand later):

• Architectural decision records (those go in DECISIONS.md and need maintainer signoff)
• Anything that requires running paid calls in CI (the cost-discipline rule needs a separate ADR)

On v0.3.2.1: I'll branch the release work today and bundle your copy-fix into the cut. Expected ship: 2026-05-26 ± 1 day. The handbook contribution can go in the same release if you have time, or land separately as a follow-up — your call. Either way, you're in the v0.3.2.1 CHANGELOG ### Fixed for this PR, and the handbook contribution would get its own ### Documentation entry.