fix: AJV schema for removing an agent from a department

[KevLehman]

Proposed changes (including videos or screenshots)

Issue(s)

https://rocketchat.atlassian.net/browse/CTZ-230
https://rocketchat.atlassian.net/browse/CTZ-233

Steps to test or reproduce

Further comments

Not so common to remove agents this way, but it was not working. Caused by a refactor on 7.7.
Introduced by: #35854

[dionisio-bot]

Looks like this PR is ready to merge! 🎉
If you have any trouble, please check the PR guidelines

[changeset-bot]

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: dc9afaa

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 37 packages

Name	Type
@rocket.chat/meteor	Patch
@rocket.chat/rest-typings	Patch
@rocket.chat/api-client	Patch
@rocket.chat/core-services	Patch
@rocket.chat/ddp-client	Patch
@rocket.chat/http-router	Patch
@rocket.chat/models	Patch
@rocket.chat/ui-contexts	Patch
@rocket.chat/account-service	Patch
@rocket.chat/authorization-service	Patch
@rocket.chat/ddp-streamer	Patch
@rocket.chat/stream-hub-service	Patch
@rocket.chat/omnichannel-services	Patch
@rocket.chat/presence	Patch
rocketchat-services	Patch
@rocket.chat/omnichannel-transcript	Patch
@rocket.chat/presence-service	Patch
@rocket.chat/queue-worker	Patch
@rocket.chat/network-broker	Patch
@rocket.chat/livechat	Patch
@rocket.chat/mock-providers	Patch
@rocket.chat/cron	Patch
@rocket.chat/instance-status	Patch
@rocket.chat/uikit-playground	Patch
@rocket.chat/fuselage-ui-kit	Patch
@rocket.chat/gazzodown	Patch
@rocket.chat/ui-avatar	Patch
@rocket.chat/ui-client	Patch
@rocket.chat/ui-video-conf	Patch
@rocket.chat/ui-voip	Patch
@rocket.chat/web-ui-registration	Patch
@rocket.chat/core-typings	Patch
@rocket.chat/apps	Patch
@rocket.chat/freeswitch	Patch
@rocket.chat/model-typings	Patch
@rocket.chat/license	Patch
@rocket.chat/pdf-worker	Patch

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

[github-actions]

PR Preview Action v1.6.1
🚀 View preview at https://RocketChat.github.io/Rocket.Chat/pr-preview/pr-36258/
Built to branch gh-pages at 2025-06-24 15:10 UTC. Preview will be ready when the GitHub Pages deployment is complete.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 50.00000% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 64.56%. Comparing base (f38bd57) to head (dc9afaa).
Report is 2 commits behind head on release-7.8.0.

Additional details and impacted files

@@              Coverage Diff               @@
##           release-7.8.0   #36258   +/-   ##
==============================================
  Coverage          64.56%   64.56%           
==============================================
  Files               3147     3147           
  Lines             104614   104614           
  Branches           19768    19782   +14     
==============================================
+ Hits               67544    67549    +5     
+ Misses             34385    34379    -6     
- Partials            2685     2686    +1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
e2e	57.62% <50.00%> (-0.04%)	⬇️
unit	69.18% <ø> (+0.03%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[ggazzo]

if only 2 fields are needed, we should not accept others, we should stop sending in the UI

[KevLehman]

Totally agree. However the endpoint accepted them before the ajv validator so removing them was a breaking change. I am writing a task to remove them on v8

[ggazzo]

btw not fix the frontend already?
also, are we going to backport this? If not, we're almost saying that this "break change" isn't important.

Totally my opinion and open to being convinced: from the bottom of my heart, removing these fields from the API would be a fix and not a breaking change, whoever needs to adjust it just needs to remove the fields, almost zero difficulties

[KevLehman]

Yup, backport is planned. Is one of the items I mentioned for 7.7x patch 😬 and ideally it should be on 7.8 but I just noticed the candidate is out already. Gonna check on Monday this.

On the fe, since it was meant to be backported, I tried to not include more things.

[ggazzo]

so a good mid ground solution is to allow the schema in the ajv, but remove it from the type and fix it in the frontend.

Also, open a PR removing it from version 8.0.0 already

When you do the backport, you can leave out the frontend if (you want) and type and just bring the schema (as was your first suggestion), but to consider this done all the mention points should be solved

[KevLehman]

@ggazzo you can check it now :)

I moved this one to 7.8 branch as we have to patch it to 7.7 anyways

[KevLehman]

/patch

[dionisio-bot]

Pull request #36298 added to Project: "Patch 7.7.2"