doc: rpc: fix case typo in `finalizepsbt` help (final_scriptwitness)
What the developer wrote
Authored by Sebastian Falbesoner
doc: rpc: fix case typo in `finalizepsbt` help (final_scriptwitness)
What changed, and why it matters
This commit fixes a capitalization typo in the help text for the `finalizepsbt` RPC command. The documentation previously referred to `final_scriptWitness` but the actual PSBT field name is `final_scriptwitness` (all lowercase). This is purely a documentation string change and has no effect on code behavior, transaction processing, or security.
No action required. This is a documentation-only typo fix with no security relevance.
Security signals we found
No strong security signals were identified.
Evidence from the diff
A single-character case correction in src/rpc/rawtransaction.cpp: the finalizepsbt RPCHelpMan description string changes final_scriptWitness to final_scriptwitness to match the BIP 174 field name. No executable logic, serialization, or validation code is modified.
Changed components
src/rpc/rawtransaction.cppfinalizepsbt RPC help textInspect captured patch +1 / −1
diff --git a/src/rpc/rawtransaction.cpp b/src/rpc/rawtransaction.cpp
index b7f458ea..1a8edc59 100644
--- a/src/rpc/rawtransaction.cpp
+++ b/src/rpc/rawtransaction.cpp
@@ -1608,7 +1608,7 @@ static RPCHelpMan finalizepsbt()
return RPCHelpMan{"finalizepsbt",
"Finalize the inputs of a PSBT. If the transaction is fully signed, it will produce a\n"
"network serialized transaction which can be broadcast with sendrawtransaction. Otherwise a PSBT will be\n"
- "created which has the final_scriptSig and final_scriptWitness fields filled for inputs that are complete.\n"
+ "created which has the final_scriptSig and final_scriptwitness fields filled for inputs that are complete.\n"
"Implements the Finalizer and Extractor roles.\n",
{
{"psbt", RPCArg::Type::STR, RPCArg::Optional::NO, "A base64 string of a PSBT"},
Why this scored 15/100
Community notes
Notes can correct, qualify, or add evidence to the AI analysis. Every note shown here has been validated by a human moderator.
The AI analysis stands alone for now. Submit a note if you can add evidence or important context.