fix: Send request queue write fields under the names the API declares

[vdusek]

add_request and batch_add_requests sent request fields snake_cased. The API declares its write bodies with additionalProperties: false, so it rejected the whole write with HTTP 400 — a request carrying user_data, no_retry, retry_count, loaded_url, error_messages, or handled_at could not be added at all. The identical dict passed to update_request worked:

add_request     -> 400  {"uniqueKey": "k", "url": "...", "user_data": {...}, "no_retry": true}
update_request  -> 200  {"uniqueKey": "k", "url": "...", "userData":  {...}, "noRetry":  true}

The client was using RequestDraft (the spec's response-only schema for unprocessedRequests, which declares only id/unique_key/url/method and leaves the rest to extra='allow') as its input model. The spec actually declares both add-request bodies as RequestWithoutId, now correctly generated as its own model since apify-docs#2774 fixed the spec bundler dropping its identity — no custom postprocessing needed. Upstream spec fix (apify-docs#2774) is closed.

Two things to know:

• Validation narrows. The newly declared fields are validated instead of passed through, so retry_count='abc' or a naive handled_at now raise ValidationError instead of a 400 from the API.
• update_request's timestamp format changes (fa77d88): mode='json' emits ISO 8601 where python mode emitted 2019-06-16 10:23:31.607000+00:00. The API accepts both, so this is spec fidelity, not a fix — its own commit, revertible alone.

Integration tests round-trip every field through both add paths against the live API; they fail on master with InvalidRequestError.

✍️ Drafted by Claude Code

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 50.00000% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 95.21%. Comparing base (f1d5a06) to head (10b81a5).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/apify_client/_typeddicts.py	0.00%	4 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1026      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   94.97%   95.21%   +0.24%     
==========================================
  Files          58       58              
  Lines        5450     5436      -14     
==========================================
  Hits         5176     5176              
+ Misses        274      260      -14     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integration	91.97% <50.00%> (+0.29%)	⬆️
unit	87.21% <50.00%> (+0.81%)	⬆️

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

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 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.

[vdusek]

Btw. this is not an issue in the current SDK, because it uses the Crawlee's Request model with explicit camelCase aliases on fields.