feat: add content type generic for guide step content

[thomaswhyyou]

Description

Adds a generic type parameter for typing guide step contents, which users can pass in when using the useGuide(s) hooks or calling the selecteGuide(s) methods in the guide client.

Note, there is a corresponding CLI PR (knocklabs/knock-cli#575) to add a new knock guide generate-types command which generates types for all guides in a given environment automatically.

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project	Deployment	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
javascript-ms-teams-connect-example	Ready	Preview	Comment	Sep 3, 2025 7:33pm
javascript-nextjs-example	Ready	Preview	Comment	Sep 3, 2025 7:33pm
javascript-slack-connect-example	Ready	Preview	Comment	Sep 3, 2025 7:33pm
javascript-slack-kit-example	Ready	Preview	Comment	Sep 3, 2025 7:33pm

[linear]

KNO-8284 [SDK] Typing in the React SDK for the useGuide hook

[changeset-bot]

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: 0907b4e

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

[thomaswhyyou]

• feat: add content type generic for guide step content #722 👈 (View in Graphite)
• main

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

[cjbell]

Wondering if unknown is better than any here

[thomaswhyyou]

I was on the fence about that but decided to keep it as any for this PR. I understand unknown is considered a "safer" choice, but I'm afraid it would end up adding a lot of boilerplate/annoyance in practice..

Besides, it was initially typed as any so switching to unknown here would technically be a breaking change? I'm definitely open to the idea, but I suspect it's better handled as a separate version if we do decide to make that change.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 66.66667% with 5 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 63.74%. Comparing base (b8b64e4) to head (0907b4e).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...ges/react-core/src/modules/guide/hooks/useGuide.ts	25.00%	3 Missing ⚠️
...es/react-core/src/modules/guide/hooks/useGuides.ts	33.33%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #722      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   63.73%   63.74%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         185      185              
  Lines        7450     7458       +8     
  Branches      879      879              
==========================================
+ Hits         4748     4754       +6     
- Misses       2676     2678       +2     
  Partials       26       26              

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
packages/client/src/clients/guide/client.ts	90.62% <100.00%> (+0.08%)	⬆️
packages/client/src/clients/guide/types.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...es/react-core/src/modules/guide/hooks/useGuides.ts	25.00% <33.33%> (ø)
...ges/react-core/src/modules/guide/hooks/useGuide.ts	16.66% <25.00%> (-2.09%)	⬇️