This topic was automatically generated from Slack. You can find the original thread here.
I am trying to use the SerpApi with Connect and I am not sure what I am doing wrong. My system is working with out ApiKey type integrations. I have connected and got an account id. Here is an example payload
I tried that. Here was the response from getting the configurable props
“result”: [
{
“app”: “serpapi”,
“name”: “app”,
“type”: “app”
},
{
“name”: “engine”,
“type”: “string”,
“label”: “Engine”,
“description”: “Engine to send the query to”
},
{
“name”: “q”,
“type”: “string”,
“label”: “Query”,
“description”: “The query you want to search. You can use anything that you would use in a regular Google search. e.g. inurl:, site:, intitle:. SerpApi also supports advanced search query parameters such as as_dt and as_eq. See the full list of supported advanced search query parameters.”
},
{
“name”: “device”,
“type”: “string”,
“label”: “Device”,
“description”: “Defines the device to use to get the results”
},
{
“name”: “noCache”,
“type”: “boolean”,
“label”: “No Cache”,
“description”: “Force SerpApi to fetch the Google results even if a cached version is already present”
}
],
None of the parameters are marked as dynamic though
{
"app": "serpapi",
"name": "app",
"type": "app"
},
{
"name": "engine",
"type": "string",
"label": "Engine",
"description": "Engine to send the query to"
},
{
"name": "q",
"type": "string",
"label": "Query",
"description": "The query you want to search. You can use anything that you would use in a regular Google search. e.g. `inurl:`, `site:`, `intitle:`. SerpApi also supports advanced search query parameters such as `as_dt` and `as_eq`. See the [full list](https://serpapi.com/advanced-google-query-parameters) of supported advanced search query parameters."
},
{
"name": "device",
"type": "string",
"label": "Device",
"description": "Defines the device to use to get the results"
},
{
"name": "noCache",
"type": "boolean",
"label": "No Cache",
"description": "Force SerpApi to fetch the Google results even if a cached version is already present"
}
That’s not a bug, no, that’s the name of the app prop in the definition you shared, I just missed it there also. It is definitely an inconsistency that we’re working to improve, but it’s not a bug.
yeah this part of the api has a ton of footguns in it. You should really just have a separate param for authProvisionId instead of this magic configurable param in my opinion