The owner asked whether an empty token was being sent. It was not — an empty one
returns `missing` — but the question was worth following, and it found a fault
in the message I had just added.
The check classified 401 and 403 as `rejected` and then read the body. Every
OTHER unsuccessful response — 404, 429, 500, a cache's status page — has no
`zones` key, `?? []` turned that into no zones, and the console then stated "this
account holds no zones at all. The token probably belongs to a different Hetzner
project." A claim about somebody's account, derived from an error nobody looked
at, delivered with more confidence than the working case gets.
`successful()` is asked first now, and an unexpected status is reported as what
it is, with the number beside it: it says nothing about the zones, and it says
so. That is the distinction this check already draws between `unreachable` and
`read_only` — both are failures, only one of them tells you anything about the
token.
A genuinely empty list still means what it meant: 200 with zero zones is a token
for a project without zones.
The test uses a dataset rather than a loop. Http::fake() ADDS stubs instead of
replacing them, so a loop would have had the first status answer all four
iterations and the test would have proved one case three times over.
2050 tests pass, assets build.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
c81a89ce5a