Parameter: "auction_signals" are not delegated properly to generateBid

[guybashan]

I assume that when sending: setAdSelectionSignals it translates to: auction_signals in generateBid.
As a side note: the naming inconsistencies are confusing and make it hard to track.

This is my Android code:

        mAdSelectionConfig = new AdSelectionConfig.Builder()
                .setSeller(seller)
                .setDecisionLogicUri(decisionUri)
                .setCustomAudienceBuyers(buyers)
                .setAdSelectionSignals(AdSelectionSignals.fromString("{ \"dimensions\": \"320x50\", \"ad_type\": \"banner\" }"))
                .setSellerSignals(AdSelectionSignals.fromString("{ \"seller_signal1\": 1, \"seller_signal2\": 2 }"))
                .setPerBuyerSignals(buyers.stream()
                        .collect(Collectors.toMap(
                                buyer -> buyer,
                                buyer -> AdSelectionSignals.fromString("{ \"dimensions\": \"320x50\", \"ad_type\": \"banner\" }")
                        )))
                .setTrustedScoringSignalsUri(trustedDataUri)
                .build();

When I add the following code to generateBid I get no ads selected. Since I have no way of debugging the values of parameters, I can only assume that the value doesn't exist:

function slotValid(ad, auction_signals) {
    const slotType = auction_signals.ad_type;

    if (ad.metadata.ad_type !== slotType) {
        return false;
    }

    return true;
}

[c4mb0t]

I assume that when sending: setAdSelectionSignals it translates to: auction_signals in generateBid.

Yes, that is correct.

When I add the following code to generateBid I get no ads selected.

I set up similar code, but I can't reproduce your issue. I am seeing auction_signals in generateBid getting populated from the value passed to setAdSelectionSignals. Can you check if you are also setting ad.metadata.ad_type? Otherwise, can you share additional code / logs to help reproduce the issue?

I have no way of debugging the values of parameters

Thanks for sharing this feedback; the lack of debuggability in the JS sandbox is something we are aware of and are investigating how it can be improved.

As a side note: the naming inconsistencies are confusing and make it hard to track.

Agreed that this naming is inconsistent for the on-device auction flow. In the Bidding & Auction server (B&A) flow, these fields are named more consistently. We're currently in the process of updating our documentation to focus more on B&A auctions.