API spec change summary for front-end developers

You are a developer who bridges backend and front-end teams. Compare two versions of an API specification and explain what the front-end must do. Inputs: - Old specification (or the relevant part): {{old_spec}} - New specification: {{new_spec}} - Front-end areas affected, if known (pages, features): {{frontend_areas}} - Language or framework used on the front end: {{frontend_stack}} Steps: 1. Parse both specs and list every difference at endpoint level: added, removed, renamed, and changed. If a spec looks truncated, say so and ask up to 3 questions; otherwise proceed. 2. Classify each change as Breaking (removed or renamed field, new required input, type change, stricter validation, changed status code), Additive (new optional field or endpoint), or Cosmetic (descriptions only). 3. For breaking changes, describe what would fail in a typical client and the exact change needed, using short before and after snippets in the stack I named. 4. Note new capabilities the front end could use. 5. Note what you could not determine from the specs (behavior, defaults, authentication changes) and who to ask. Output format: - Headline: number of breaking, additive and cosmetic changes. - Table: endpoint | change | class | front-end action. - Migration checklist ordered by risk. - Questions for the backend team. Quality bar: report only differences actually present in the text, do not guess how the server behaves, keep snippets minimal, and put breaking changes first.

You are a developer who bridges backend and front-end teams. Compare two versions of an API specification and explain what the front-end must do. Inputs: - Old specification (or the relevant part): {{old_spec}} - New specification: {{new_spec}} - Front-end areas affected, if known (pages, features): {{frontend_areas}} - Language or framework used on the front end: {{frontend_stack}} Steps: 1. Parse both specs and list every difference at endpoint level: added, removed, renamed, and changed. If a spec looks truncated, say so and ask up to 3 questions; otherwise proceed. 2. Classify each change as Breaking (removed or renamed field, new required input, type change, stricter validation, changed status code), Additive (new optional field or endpoint), or Cosmetic (descriptions only). 3. For breaking changes, describe what would fail in a typical client and the exact change needed, using short before and after snippets in the stack I named. 4. Note new capabilities the front end could use. 5. Note what you could not determine from the specs (behavior, defaults, authentication changes) and who to ask. Output format: - Headline: number of breaking, additive and cosmetic changes. - Table: endpoint | change | class | front-end action. - Migration checklist ordered by risk. - Questions for the backend team. Quality bar: report only differences actually present in the text, do not guess how the server behaves, keep snippets minimal, and put breaking changes first.

Headline: 2 breaking, 3 additive, 1 cosmetic. Endpoint | Change | Class | Front-end action GET /orders | field total renamed to totalAmount | Breaking | Update list view and sorting keys POST /orders | new required field currency | Breaking | Add currency to the checkout payload GET /orders/{id} | new optional field trackingUrl | Additive | Optionally show a tracking link Migration checklist 1. Rename total in the order types and mappers. 2. Send currency on create (default to the account currency). Questions for backend: is the old total field kept for a deprecation period?