feat(universes): Add place-level user restriction support

[commonly-ts]

Description

Extends the Universes class to allow updating user restrictions at the place level by accepting an optional placeId parameter. Adjusts the resource path logic to handle both universe-level and place-level user restrictions.

Type of Change

• ✨ New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• ✅ Test update

Changes Made

• Adds placeId parameter to universes.updateUserRestriction
• Updates universes.updateUserRestriction to use an options object for universeId, placeId and body.
• Adds placeId check to the updateUserRestriction test.

Testing

• All existing tests pass (pnpm test)
• Added new tests for new functionality
• Tested manually (describe below)

Manual Testing

Simple string concatenation so no manual testing needed

Code Quality

• My code follows the project's coding style
• I have run pnpm lint and fixed any issues
• I have run pnpm format to format my code
• I have run pnpm typecheck and there are no type errors
• I have reviewed my own code

Documentation

• I have updated the relevant documentation (if applicable)
• I have added/updated JSDoc comments for new/modified code

Screenshots/Recordings

Checklist

• I have read the CONTRIBUTING.md guide
• My PR title follows the Conventional Commits format
• I have rebased my branch on the latest main branch
• I have tested my changes against the Roblox Open Cloud API (if applicable)
• This PR is ready for review

---

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 91.66667% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/resources/universes.ts	91.66%	1 Missing ⚠️

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

[commonly-ts]

I would agree if the method's parameters are a bit icky now, I'm fine with changing it into options typed with an interface if you'd like

[marinofranz]

I agree, let's make this into an options object so we can re-use
There are a couple of other methods that have this feature as well, you can integrate the options object into that as well if you're feeling up for it 🙂

Make sure to add this to a test or create a new one so coverage can pass

[marinofranz]

There are a few changes that I want to address regarding the code style, the logic is perfectly fine 🙂

[commonly-ts]

also wondering about readability for duration as its not particularly clear that it needs to be in seconds with "s" at the end, unless you go and read the API docs.

could rename it to durationSeconds and have it as a number, and then parse it inside the function or is this SDK just a base wrapper without that sort of thing?

[marinofranz]

also wondering about readability for duration as its not particularly clear that it needs to be in seconds with "s" at the end, unless you go and read the API docs.

could rename it to durationSeconds and have it as a number, and then parse it inside the function or is this SDK just a base wrapper without that sort of thing?

We try to stick to just the API reference but we can eventually figure out a helper function for that, this will do for now 🙂
There's just one missing test that should test if duration is an empty string to pass coverage