Three review findings.
The sanitizer missed two credential shapes that requests puts in its
exception text verbatim: `Authorization: Bearer <token>` and
`https://user:password@host`. Both would have gone straight into a
response. The auth-scheme name and the username are kept -- they say
which credential and whose without being the secret.
The AST test only asked whether *something* had been logged, so a
`logger.info("failed")` satisfied it while discarding the exception just
as completely. It now requires an error-level record carrying exc_info
and `describe_exception()` called on the handler's own bound exception.
Enforcing that revealed the first cut had scoped itself wrongly. I had
converted the nine handlers that logged nothing and left the sixty that
logged, reasoning their detail was at least in the journal. But
/system/status is one of the sixty, and on the failing device it told me
nothing -- the journal was exactly what could not be read. Splitting
them left most of the diagnostic surface unhelpful for the case this
change exists for, so all sixty-nine now carry the detail.
Two handlers had no bound exception name, and three passed the message
through a variable rather than a literal; both shapes needed doing by
hand. Full suite: 2383 passed, one pre-existing unrelated failure.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Udr6MfaFLUPhX5Fgo67Jf5
