Moving listwallets out of the wallet category on rpc help #11589

Expected behaviour

listwallets is currently the only command under the wallet category which is not wallet-specific. In other words, it operates at the global level.

Actual behaviour

Adding support for this feature on the bitcoin-core js client is more complicated as there is no way to automatically detect which commands require a wallet to be set. Moving this out of the wallet category would be a plus (e.g. over to control). Another option could be listing a command's support for multiwallet on the help output or providing an rpc with command definitions.

What version of bitcoin-core are you using?

0.15.0.1

listwallets definitively belongs to the wallet(module) and therefore is in the right place. If you want to do reliable auto-detection of commands requiring to specify a wallet to operate on, then you could parse the RPC source code and look for GetWalletForJSONRPCRequest(). Or just add a static exception list.

That's not possible in a remote server context. Adding a static exception a list is what is being done right now (based on GetWalletForJSONRPCRequest()), but it's not ideal.

I don't have a strong preference about whether this should be under the control or wallet category.

signrawtransaction belongs to the wallet module too but it's in the rawtransaction category. That said I don't think there should be a 1 to 1 relation between wallet category and wallet module.

IMO listwallets fits better in the control category.

Even in #10579 the category is rawtransaction for both variants of signing.

Even in #10579 the category is rawtransaction for both variants of signing.

No, in #10579, signrawtransactionwithwallet is wallet category:

+    { "wallet",             "signrawtransactionwithwallet",     &signrawtransactionwithwallet,  {"hexstring","prevtxs","sighashtype"} },

Ah sorry my bad!

Since the category suggestion does not appear to a consensual choice, what about listing support for multiwallet on a specific endpoint (could be a rest endpoint with command schemas) or even under help for now?

The feature request didn't seem to attract much attention in the past. Also, the issue seems not important enough right now to keep it sitting around idle in the list of open issues.

Closing due to lack of interest. Pull requests with improvements are always welcome.