Trying to understand the specific validation requirements for the POST /api/v2/screenshare/recordings endpoint when operating under a Partner App context with multi-tenant OAuth integration. We are currently deploying a custom analytics suite that aggregates screen recording metadata across several distinct Genesys Cloud organizations. The authentication flow utilizes the standard OAuth 2.0 client credentials grant to obtain a token for the parent organization, followed by a token exchange to access sub-tenant resources.
While the initial token exchange succeeds without issue, the subsequent attempt to retrieve or annotate screen recording metadata fails consistently. The API returns a 422 Unprocessable Entity error. This is particularly confusing because the same OAuth token works perfectly for other endpoints, such as GET /api/v2/recordings or GET /api/v2/users. The error suggests a payload mismatch, but the request body is minimal.
The failing request looks like this:
POST /api/v2/screenshare/recordings/{recordingId}/metadata
Content-Type: application/json
Authorization: Bearer <valid_partner_token>{
“customData”: {
“integrationId”: “pf-int-882”,
“sessionId”: “sess-xyz-991”
}
}Response: 422 Unprocessable Entity
{“code”:“unprocessable_entity”,“message”:“Invalid custom data structure.”,“details”:[“Field ‘customData’ must be an object of type ‘string’.”]}
The documentation for the Screen Recording API mentions that custom metadata fields must be stringified, but the error message explicitly states the field must be an object of type ‘string’, which seems contradictory given the JSON schema examples provided in the Swagger docs. We are using the latest version of the platform API (v2).
Has anyone successfully implemented this specific metadata injection pattern for Partner Apps? We have verified that the user associated with the OAuth token has the screenshare:recording:admin permission. The issue appears isolated to the structure of the customData payload when passed through the partner API gateway. Any insights into the exact serialization format expected here would be appreciated.