Microsoft.Security async operation results and statuses apis #37917

amih90 · 2025-10-05T05:57:06Z

ARM (Control Plane) API Specification Update Pull Request

Tip

Overwhelmed by all this guidance? See the Getting help section at the bottom of this PR description.

PR review workflow diagram

Please understand this diagram before proceeding. It explains how to get your PR approved & merged.

Purpose of this PR

What's the purpose of this PR? Check the specific option that applies. This is mandatory!

New resource provider.
New API version for an existing resource provider. (If API spec is not defined in TypeSpec, the PR should have been created in adherence to OpenAPI specs PR creation guidance).
Update existing version for a new feature. (This is applicable only when you are revising a private preview API version.)
Update existing version to fix OpenAPI spec quality issues in S360.
Convert existing OpenAPI spec to TypeSpec spec (do not combine this with implementing changes for a new API version).
[] Other, please clarify:
- edit this with your clarification

Due diligence checklist

To merge this PR, you must go through the following checklist and confirm you understood
and followed the instructions by checking all the boxes:

I confirm this PR is modifying Azure Resource Manager (ARM) related specifications, and not data plane related specifications.
I have reviewed following Resource Provider guidelines, including
ARM resource provider contract and
REST guidelines (estimated time: 4 hours).
I understand this is required before I can proceed to the diagram Step 2, "ARM API changes review", for this PR.
A release plan has been created. If not, please create one as it will help guide you through the REST API and SDK creation process.

Additional information

Viewing API changes

For convenient view of the API changes made by this PR, refer to the URLs provided in the table
in the Generated ApiView comment added to this PR. You can use ApiView to show API versions diff.

Suppressing failures

If one or multiple validation error/warning suppression(s) is detected in your PR, please follow the
suppressions guide to get approval.

Getting help

First, please carefully read through this PR description, from top to bottom. Please fill out the Purpose of this PR and Due diligence checklist.
If you don't have permissions to remove or add labels to the PR, request write access per aka.ms/azsdk/access#request-access-to-rest-api-or-sdk-repositories
To understand what you must do next to merge this PR, see the Next Steps to Merge comment. It will appear within few minutes of submitting this PR and will continue to be up-to-date with current PR state.
For guidance on fixing this PR CI check failures, see the hyperlinks provided in given failure
and https://aka.ms/ci-fix.
For help with ARM review (PR workflow diagram Step 2), see https://aka.ms/azsdk/pr-arm-review.
If the PR CI checks appear to be stuck in queued state, please add a comment with contents /azp run.
This should result in a new comment denoting a PR validation pipeline has started and the checks should be updated after few minutes.
If the help provided by the previous points is not enough, post to https://aka.ms/azsdk/support/specreview-channel and link to this PR.
For guidance on SDK breaking change review, refer to https://aka.ms/ci-fix.

github-actions · 2025-10-05T05:57:21Z

Next Steps to Merge

Next steps that must be taken to merge this PR:

❌ This PR is in purview of the ARM review (label: ARMReview). This PR must get ARMSignedOff label from an ARM reviewer.
This PR is awaiting ARM reviewer feedback (label: WaitForARMFeedback).
To learn when this PR will get reviewed, see ARM review queue at aka.ms/azsdk/pr-arm-review
For details of the ARM review, see aka.ms/azsdk/pr-arm-review

Comment generated by summarize-checks workflow run.

github-actions · 2025-10-05T05:59:09Z

API Change Check

APIView identified API level changes in this PR and created the following API reviews

Language	API Review for Package
Swagger	common
Go	sdk/resourcemanager/security/armsecurity
Java	com.azure.resourcemanager:azure-resourcemanager-security
JavaScript	@azure/arm-security

eliagrady · 2025-10-05T06:37:02Z

...ecurity/resource-manager/Microsoft.Security/preview/2025-10-01-preview/operationResults.json

+          "200": {
+            "description": "Successfully retrieved the operation result."
+          },
+          "202": {


When reading the operation resource entity, the status code should always be 200. The response payload indicates if the async operation is still running or has completed (successfully or with a failure).

See here:
https://github.com/cloud-and-ai-microsoft/resource-provider-contract/blob/master/v1.0/async-api-reference.md#asynchronous-operations

Please check the table at https://github.com/cloud-and-ai-microsoft/resource-provider-contract/blob/master/v1.0/async-api-reference.md#example-flow
operation results has 202 and Location, RetryAfter support. tried to map it again and updated the PR accordingly

It is about the 200 status code

mentat9 · 2025-10-06T19:07:52Z

@amih90 - Your PR is not ready for ARM review. Please fill out the onboarding form so reviewers have context for the review. Also, if this PR is for a new API version, you need to start with a base commit made by copying the existing files unchanged to the new API version folder. Then apply changes for the new API version in subsequent commits.

mentat9 · 2025-10-07T00:48:11Z

@amih90 - Please ensure your PR passes Swagger LintDiff and Avocado checks.

amih90 · 2025-10-07T12:12:07Z

@amih90 - Please ensure your PR passes Swagger LintDiff and Avocado checks.

@mentat9

Avodaco: I will ask and exception for Avocado as Microsoft.Security RP has not yet migrated to a single api-versions at the moment. I am not sure I can do anything with it in this specific scope.
LintDiff: by https://github.com/Azure/azure-resource-manager-rpc/blob/master/v1.0/async-api-reference.md it clearly state that i should support also 204 status code. Can you suggest if I should follow the spec or remove 204 from the API to fix the validation?

mentat9 · 2025-10-09T22:54:04Z

@amih90 - Please ensure your PR passes Swagger LintDiff and Avocado checks.

@mentat9

Avodaco: I will ask and exception for Avocado as Microsoft.Security RP has not yet migrated to a single api-versions at the moment. I am not sure I can do anything with it in this specific scope.

LintDiff: by https://github.com/Azure/azure-resource-manager-rpc/blob/master/v1.0/async-api-reference.md it clearly state that i should support also 204 status code. Can you suggest if I should follow the spec or remove 204 from the API to fix the validation?

Avocado - When does your team plan to move to uniform versioning? I've added the approval label but note that some SDKs depend on it, so you may have issues generating SDKs.
LintDiff - Add a suppression for false positive: https://aka.ms/azsdk/pr-suppressions.

amih90 · 2025-10-12T09:41:08Z

@amih90 - Please ensure your PR passes Swagger LintDiff and Avocado checks.

@mentat9

Avodaco: I will ask and exception for Avocado as Microsoft.Security RP has not yet migrated to a single api-versions at the moment. I am not sure I can do anything with it in this specific scope.

LintDiff: by https://github.com/Azure/azure-resource-manager-rpc/blob/master/v1.0/async-api-reference.md it clearly state that i should support also 204 status code. Can you suggest if I should follow the spec or remove 204 from the API to fix the validation?

Avocado - When does your team plan to move to uniform versioning? I've added the approval label but note that some SDKs depend on it, so you may have issues generating SDKs.

LintDiff - Add a suppression for false positive: https://aka.ms/azsdk/pr-suppressions.

Avocado: It's in our plans. @eliagrady can you provide an ETA?
LintDiff: Added a surpression request, I hope it's align to the requirement.

psah434 · 2025-10-13T21:29:38Z

...tion/security/resource-manager/Microsoft.Security/preview/2025-10-01-preview/operations.json

+    }
+  },
+  "paths": {
+    "/providers/Microsoft.Security/operations": {


is this a tenant level API?

PAS Approval and questions about authorization needs to be discussed.

The operations.json is an existing api and out of scope for this PR, it was added to address first comment by @mentat9 "if this PR is for a new API version, you need to start with a base commit made by copying the existing files unchanged to the new API version folder."

amih90 · 2025-10-15T10:54:21Z

Not sure which changes are required.

eliagrady

reviewed

eliagrady · 2025-10-16T13:48:55Z

@mentat9 - if the first commit (base commit) only does a partial copy (since we're still not using a unified API version) - will it help? as we understand what a base commit for a new api version should look like, but we cannot make it include all of our RP's resource types.

github-actions bot added brownfield Brownfield services will soon be required to convert to TypeSpec. See https://aka.ms/azsdk/typespec. ARMReview new-api-version resource-manager WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required labels Oct 5, 2025

eliagrady reviewed Oct 5, 2025

View reviewed changes

amih90 added the PublishToCustomers Acknowledgement the changes will be published to Azure customers. label Oct 6, 2025

mentat9 added the ARMChangesRequested label Oct 6, 2025

github-actions bot removed the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label Oct 6, 2025

amih90 force-pushed the ami/35421676-microsoft.security-public-api branch from cdf261c to 4f3d4fe Compare October 6, 2025 19:42

base commit

3b6a7a0

amih90 force-pushed the ami/35421676-microsoft.security-public-api branch from 4f3d4fe to 6384cca Compare October 6, 2025 19:53

operation results and statuses

bd3e603

amih90 force-pushed the ami/35421676-microsoft.security-public-api branch from 6384cca to bd3e603 Compare October 6, 2025 19:56

update readme

8e2bd8a

amih90 removed the ARMChangesRequested label Oct 6, 2025

github-actions bot added the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label Oct 6, 2025

Ami Hollander added 2 commits October 6, 2025 23:01

missing list operations examples

61c2322

composite-v3

e445c79

mentat9 added the ARMChangesRequested label Oct 7, 2025

github-actions bot removed the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label Oct 7, 2025

amih90 removed the ARMChangesRequested label Oct 9, 2025

github-actions bot added the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label Oct 9, 2025

mentat9 added the Approved-Avocado label Oct 9, 2025

mentat9 added the ARMChangesRequested label Oct 9, 2025

github-actions bot removed the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label Oct 9, 2025

lintdiff supression

678df44

github-actions bot added the SuppressionReviewRequired label Oct 12, 2025

amih90 removed the ARMChangesRequested label Oct 12, 2025

github-actions bot added the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label Oct 12, 2025

psah434 reviewed Oct 13, 2025

View reviewed changes

psah434 added Approved-LintDiff ARMChangesRequested and removed WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required labels Oct 13, 2025

amih90 removed the ARMChangesRequested label Oct 15, 2025

github-actions bot added the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label Oct 15, 2025

eliagrady approved these changes Oct 15, 2025

View reviewed changes

amih90 enabled auto-merge (squash) October 15, 2025 14:17

psah434 added ARMChangesRequested and removed WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required labels Oct 15, 2025

amih90 removed the ARMChangesRequested label Oct 16, 2025

github-actions bot added the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label Oct 16, 2025

Microsoft.Security async operation results and statuses apis #37917

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Microsoft.Security async operation results and statuses apis #37917

Conversation

amih90 commented Oct 5, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

ARM (Control Plane) API Specification Update Pull Request

PR review workflow diagram

Purpose of this PR

Due diligence checklist

Additional information

Getting help

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Oct 5, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Next Steps to Merge

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Oct 5, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

API Change Check

Uh oh!

eliagrady Oct 5, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

amih90 Oct 5, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

psah434 Oct 13, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mentat9 commented Oct 6, 2025

Uh oh!

mentat9 commented Oct 7, 2025

Uh oh!

amih90 commented Oct 7, 2025

Uh oh!

mentat9 commented Oct 9, 2025

Uh oh!

amih90 commented Oct 12, 2025

Uh oh!

psah434 Oct 13, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

amih90 Oct 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

psah434 Oct 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

amih90 Oct 16, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

amih90 commented Oct 15, 2025

Uh oh!

eliagrady left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

eliagrady commented Oct 16, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

amih90 commented Oct 5, 2025 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Oct 5, 2025 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Oct 5, 2025 •

edited

Loading