Clarify --raw flag help

[jrodewig]

Ticket(s): FE-6234

Problem

The current --raw and .toggleRawResponses help text mentions the API response. This is misleading as the response actually comes from the JS driver.

Solution

Rewords the text to avoid mentioning "full API response".

Result

Meh...? We could mention the JS driver here, but I think that gets very implementation-detail-y. This is mostly helpful for folks looking for query stats.

Testing

N/A

[ptpaterson]

The "simple" format is what is returned from the API and displayed without additional processing. I don't think it is inaccurate to say API response body.

[jrodewig]

The "simple" format is what is returned from the API and displayed without additional processing. I don't think it is inaccurate to say API response body.

I don't think it's related to data format. We omit stuff like the error obj and schema_version (because it's omitted in the JS driver). The shape is also slightly different.

For example, if you run the invalid query Time. with fauna query --raw:

{
  "httpStatus": 400,
  "code": "invalid_query",
  "queryInfo": {
    "txn_ts": 1734032472313204,
    "summary": "error: Expected identifier\nat *query*:1:6\n  |\n1 | Time.\n  |      ^\n  |",
    "stats": {
      "compute_ops": 1,
      "read_ops": 0,
      "write_ops": 0,
      "query_time_ms": 36,
      "contention_retries": 0,
      "storage_bytes_read": 0,
      "storage_bytes_write": 0,
      "rate_limits_hit": []
    }
  },
  "name": "QueryCheckError"
}

In the HTTP API, the JSON response is:

{
  "error": {
    "code": "invalid_query",
    "message": "The query failed 1 validation check"
  },
  "summary": "error: Expected identifier\nat *query*:1:6\n  |\n1 | Time.\n  |      ^\n  |",
  "txn_ts": 1734032560308032,
  "stats": {
    "compute_ops": 1,
    "read_ops": 0,
    "write_ops": 0,
    "query_time_ms": 1,
    "contention_retries": 0,
    "storage_bytes_read": 0,
    "storage_bytes_write": 0,
    "rate_limits_hit": []
  },
  "schema_version": 1734013351355000
}

[ptpaterson]

Okay thank you for clarifying. I'm good with this. I am still trying to work out the final behavior of --raw (or whatever it may evolve into).