feat: include authz course role assignments in Meilisearch access_ids

[wgu-taylor-payne]

Description

Studio search is powered by Meilisearch. On each request to the Studio search token endpoint (GET /api/content_search/v2/studio/), get_access_ids_for_request builds the per-user tenant-token filter that Meilisearch enforces server-side. Until now that filter was built from legacy CourseStaffRole / CourseInstructorRole assignments only.

Users who hold an authz-only course role — course_editor or course_auditor granted through openedx-authz, with no corresponding legacy CourseAccessRole row — were therefore invisible to the filter, and their courses returned zero results in the global Studio search modal (search icon / Cmd+K) and the "Review Content Updates" tab on the Library Updates page (/course/{id}/libraries), which uses Meilisearch to look up component details.

This change adds a _get_authz_course_keys helper that unions the user's authz course-role assignments into the access_id filter when AUTHZ_COURSE_AUTHORING_FLAG is enabled. The flag is a CourseWaffleFlag, so the check is applied per course — a deployment running the flag globally-off with per-course or per-org overrides still resolves correctly.

The lookup fails open: a DatabaseError from the authz/Casbin backend is logged and degrades to legacy-role access rather than returning a 500, while any unexpected exception propagates so real bugs surface. A non-course scope key (e.g. a library scope) is skipped via InvalidKeyError.

Impacted user roles: Course Author (editors/auditors who rely on authz roles), Operator (behavior is gated behind AUTHZ_COURSE_AUTHORING_FLAG).

Supporting information

• Fixes Studio search (Meilisearch) does not include courses for authz-only users openedx-authz#417
• Originally surfaced during testing of the view_library_updates enforcement work in Add courses.view_library_updates enforcement in openedx-platform openedx-authz#398 and PR feat: split read vs write authz checks for library updates #39009.

Testing instructions

1. Enable AUTHZ_COURSE_AUTHORING_FLAG (globally, or as a per-course override for the course under test).
2. Create a user with an authz course_editor (or course_auditor) role on a course, and no legacy CourseStaffRole/CourseInstructorRole on it.
3. As that user, open the global Studio search modal and search for content in that course — the course's content now appears (previously: zero results).
4. Open the course's Library Updates page → "Review Content Updates" tab and confirm component details resolve.
5. Automated: pytest openedx/core/djangoapps/content/search/tests/test_models.py — see StudioSearchAuthzAccessTest (authz-only user sees courses with flag on, omit_orgs applies, flag-off excludes, DatabaseError swallowed, unexpected error propagates, unparseable scope skipped, legacy+authz de-duplicate).

Deadline

None.

Other information

• Feature-flagged. Behavior only changes when AUTHZ_COURSE_AUTHORING_FLAG resolves enabled for a given course; with the flag off everywhere and no overrides, access_ids are unchanged from today.
• Performance / follow-up (not blocking): the authz assignments are fetched and then flag-filtered per course. get_user_role_assignments_per_scope_type eagerly expands each role's implicit permissions, but this helper only reads scope.external_key and discards the permissions — wasted work for users with many assignments. The computation runs once per token fetch (not per keystroke — the frontend reuses the minted tenant token for subsequent queries). A scopes-only authz API, and/or caching the computed access set with an explicit invalidation contract on role/flag change, would be the clean optimization; both are intentionally left out of this correctness fix.
• No database migrations.

[openedx-webhooks]

Thanks for the pull request, @wgu-taylor-payne!

This repository is currently maintained by @openedx/wg-maintenance-openedx-platform-oncall.

Once you've gone through the following steps feel free to tag them in a comment and let them know that your changes are ready for engineering review.

🔘 Get product approval

If you haven't already, check this list to see if your contribution needs to go through the product review process.

• If it does, you'll need to submit a product proposal for your contribution, and have it reviewed by the Product Working Group.
  • This process (including the steps you'll need to take) is documented here.
• If it doesn't, simply proceed with the next step.

🔘 Provide context

To help your reviewers and other members of the community understand the purpose and larger context of your changes, feel free to add as much of the following information to the PR description as you can:

• Dependencies

  This PR must be merged before / after / at the same time as ...

• Blockers

  This PR is waiting for OEP-1234 to be accepted.

• Timeline information

  This PR must be merged by XX date because ...

• Partner information

  This is for a course on edx.org.

• Supporting documentation
• Relevant Open edX discussion forum threads

🔘 Get a green build

If one or more checks are failing, continue working on your changes until this is no longer the case and your build turns green.

🔘 Update the status of your PR

Your PR is currently marked as a draft. After completing the steps above, update its status by clicking "Ready for Review", or removing "WIP" from the title, as appropriate.

---

Where can I find more information?

If you'd like to get more details on all aspects of the review process for open source pull requests (OSPRs), check out the following resources:

• Overview of Review Process for Community Contributions
• Pull Request Status Guide
• Making changes to your pull request

When can I expect my changes to be merged?

Our goal is to get community contributions seen and reviewed as efficiently as possible.

However, the amount of time that it takes to review and merge a PR can vary significantly based on factors such as:

• The size and impact of the changes that it introduces
• The need for product review
• Maintenance status of the parent repository

💡 As a result it may take up to several weeks or months to complete a review and merge your PR.