Interaction Requests should include Channel Object

[touhidurrr]

Interaction Data Structure:
https://discord.com/developers/docs/interactions/receiving-and-responding#interaction-object-interaction-data-structure

The problem is for some Conmands you would need to access Channel Name, Channel Type & Most importantly the Channel Permissions of the User (Bot). It would be better if such information is included in the Request so that Bots doesn’t need to make REST API calls again to fetch channel Information and / or store them for convenience and performance.

[erkinalp]

Given an application may receive multiple interactions per hour initiated from the same channel, this would cause serious inefficiency in communication. You should instead cache the channel metadata for a reasonable time.

[touhidurrr]

Given an application may receive multiple interactions per hour initiated from the same channel, this would cause serious inefficiency in communication. You should instead cache the channel metadata for a reasonable time.

You are basically encouraging bot developers to store data, the sole problem slash commands should be able to solve.
In many implementations that causes latency issues. Like for me who uses Serverless Functions to host my Bot. Storing data would mean using a 3rd party KV storage and which in turn would additional latency.

Despite that, if we want to go along with your logic that Interactions should send as less data as possible, interactions shouldn't send Member & User objects also like they send now but only snowflakes. And sending parsed role & channel object is also supposed to be necessary.

So, sending channel object shouldn’t be the only thing not worthy of implementing as Interactions already send many other information.

It should be also pointed out that simplicity is also something that is sought after in development. Only sending snowflakes would cause development on user side become complicated. I don't think that is of the best interest of Discord as any platforms seeks enthusiasm among developers about the platform.

Also how much is some more bytes of data? Not much. The Bots nowadays sends custom images and interactive media which requires sending hundreds of kilobytes of data which is nothing compared to incoming requests that you want to save bytes on. So, the simplicity that you want to sacrifice here isn't worth it in my opinions.

Also most time required for communication with apis over the internet is not the request bodies themselves but network latency that comes with it. So, I see no reason for not to send some additional bytes of data for the sake of simplicity & convinience.

[muddyfish]

In terms of actually saving data, I doubt that would be the case. From my perspective, the amount of usages of slash commands is way way lower than the amount of channel/role/whatever updates there are. So even in terms of network bandwidth it would be lower if you'd be able to drop those updates if interactions had them

[topi314]

Bots already receive their total permissions(including overwrites) in the channel the interaction was executed in

See https://discord.com/developers/docs/resources/guild#guild-member-object permissions field

[touhidurrr]

Did you mean the interaction.member object?
I think you are mistaken. That is the members permission who invoked the command.
What I am talking about here is the Bots permissions.

[jagrosh]

(First of all, duplicate of #3310)

This would be a valuable addition, especially for bots that don't connect to the gateway. Caching permissions is not effective, because:

• If the bot already has the needed permissions, then it will still hit a 403 if the permissions change; it would be just as effective to not check permissions at all (and save several API calls)
• If the bot doesn't have the necessary permissions, it will need to keep fetching them every request, because the normal workflow for a bot missing permissions is to alert the user to fix the permissions and then try again. Caching permissions that are supposed to change soon just leads to more confusion from the user.

[touhidurrr]

#3310 only suggests Bots Permissions, while this ones primary suggestion is including the Channel Object as a whole.