fix: Add validation for transport types in ClientFactory

[pankaj-bind]

Description

This update introduces upfront validation for transport protocols within the ClientFactory. Previously, if an invalid or misspelled transport type was provided in the ClientConfig, it would be silently ignored. This could lead to confusing ValueError('no compatible transports found.') errors later on, making it difficult to debug misconfigurations.

Changes

• src/a2a/client/client_factory.py: Added a validation loop at the beginning of the create method to check all transport types provided in the ClientConfig.
• tests/client/test_client_factory.py: Added a new unit test, test_client_factory_invalid_transport_in_config, to confirm that a ValueError is raised when an invalid transport string is used.

BEGIN_COMMIT_OVERRIDE
END_COMMIT_OVERRIDE

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @pankaj-bind, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request enhances the ClientFactory by introducing upfront validation for transport protocols. Previously, invalid or misspelled transport types in ClientConfig would be silently ignored, leading to confusing ValueError messages later in the process. The changes now ensure that an immediate and descriptive ValueError is raised if an unsupported transport type is provided, significantly improving the debugging experience and preventing misconfigurations from propagating. A new unit test has also been added to cover this validation.

Highlights

• Input Validation: Implemented a new validation step within the ClientFactory.create method to check if all specified transport types in ClientConfig are valid TransportProtocol members.
• Error Handling Improvement: Replaced silent failures or cryptic downstream errors with an immediate ValueError when an unsupported transport type is encountered, providing clearer feedback to the developer.
• Unit Testing: Added a dedicated unit test (test_client_factory_invalid_transport_in_config) to ensure the new validation correctly raises a ValueError for invalid transport configurations.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request introduces a valuable validation step in the ClientFactory to check for invalid transport types in the ClientConfig. This prevents confusing errors downstream. The implementation is straightforward and includes a new test case. My review includes a suggestion to enhance the validation logic to report all invalid transports at once, which would improve the developer experience when debugging configurations. I've also suggested parameterizing the new test to ensure it covers both single and multiple invalid transport scenarios, aligning with the proposed change.