feat: add set_node_account_ids to the query chain

[AntonioCeppellini]

Description:
This PR updates TransactionResponse.get_receipt() adding set_node_account_ids([self.node_id]) to the query chain

we now

• Pin receipt queries to the submitting node (self.node_id)
• Have a new dedicated test file
• Follow other SDKs pattern

Related issue(s):

Fixes #1686

Notes for reviewer:

Checklist

• Documented (Code comments, README, etc.)
• Tested (unit, integration, etc.)

[github-actions]

Hi, this is MergeConflictBot.
Your pull request cannot be merged because it contains merge conflicts.

Please resolve these conflicts locally and push the changes.

Quick Fix for CHANGELOG.md Conflicts

If your conflict is only in CHANGELOG.md, you can resolve it easily using the GitHub web editor:

1. Click on the "Resolve conflicts" button in the PR
2. Accept both changes (keep both changelog entries)
3. Click "Mark as resolved"
4. Commit the merge

For all other merge conflicts, please read:

• Resolving Merge Conflicts
• Rebasing Guide

Thank you for contributing!

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

Pins receipt queries in TransactionResponse.get_receipt() to the submitting node by calling .set_node_account_ids([self.node_id]) on the TransactionGetReceiptQuery. Adds unit tests verifying pinning behavior with mocked node responses and updates CHANGELOG.md entries.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Changelog CHANGELOG.md	Updated Unreleased/Changed entries: re-added grpc_deadline and type-hint entries; added entry describing receipt queries pinned to submitting node.
Receipt Query Pinning src/hiero_sdk_python/transaction/transaction_response.py	Modified TransactionResponse.get_receipt() to call .set_node_account_ids([self.node_id]) on the TransactionGetReceiptQuery before .execute(client).
Receipt Pinning Tests tests/unit/test_transaction_response.py	New unit tests for TransactionResponse validating public attributes and that get_receipt() pins the receipt query to the submitting node using mocked node responses.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant Client as Client
    participant TxResponse as TransactionResponse
    participant ReceiptQ as TransactionGetReceiptQuery
    participant NodeA as "Node 0.0.3"
    participant NodeB as "Node 0.0.4"

    Client->>TxResponse: response.get_receipt(client)
    TxResponse->>ReceiptQ: new TransactionGetReceiptQuery()
    ReceiptQ->>ReceiptQ: .set_transaction_id(txId)
    ReceiptQ->>ReceiptQ: .set_node_account_ids([submittingNode])
    ReceiptQ->>NodeA: execute(query) 
    alt NodeA returns non-retryable error
        NodeA-->>ReceiptQ: error
        ReceiptQ-->>Client: error
    else NodeA returns SUCCESS
        NodeA-->>ReceiptQ: receipt SUCCESS
        ReceiptQ-->>Client: receipt SUCCESS
    end

Loading

Estimated code review effort

🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~20 minutes

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly summarizes the main change: adding set_node_account_ids to the query chain, which is the core objective of pinning receipt queries to the submitting node.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description is related to the changeset, explaining the purpose of pinning receipt queries to the submitting node and referencing the linked issue #1686.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	The PR successfully implements the primary objective from #1686: pinning receipt queries to the submitting node by calling set_node_account_ids([self.node_id]) in TransactionResponse.get_receipt(), includes tests validating the pinning behavior, and updates the changelog.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	All changes are directly related to #1686: updating get_receipt() to pin to submitting node, adding unit tests for the new behavior, and updating CHANGELOG.md. No extraneous modifications detected.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	Docstring coverage is 100.00% which is sufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment

---

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 3

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

[coderabbitai]

🧹 Nitpick | 🔵 Trivial

Use b"" literal instead of bytes() call.

Per static analysis (ruff UP018), bytes() is an unnecessary call that can be replaced with the more idiomatic b"" literal.

♻️ Proposed fix

-    assert resp.hash == bytes(), "Default hash should be empty bytes"
+    assert resp.hash == b"", "Default hash should be empty bytes"

🧰 Tools

🪛 Ruff (0.14.14)

[warning] 34-34: Unnecessary bytes call (rewrite as a literal)

Replace with bytes literal

(UP018)

[tech0priyanshu]

Hii @AntonioCeppellini great work done ... lgtm

[tech0priyanshu]

some merge conflict @AntonioCeppellini

[manishdait]

lgtm, just needs a rebase

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1727   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.28%   93.28%           
=======================================
  Files         141      141           
  Lines        9100     9100           
=======================================
  Hits         8489     8489           
  Misses        611      611           

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

[exploreriii]

just chagelog entry please

[aceppaluni]

@AntonioCeppellini Great work!

Once rebased, happy to approve and merge!

[MonaaEid]

should this be implemented as well? ...debatable