BUG: type error in `df.attrs.update()`

[janosh]

Pandas version checks

• I have checked that this issue has not already been reported.

• I have confirmed this bug exists on the latest version of pandas.

• I have confirmed this bug exists on the main branch of pandas.

Reproducible Example

import pandas as pd

df = pd.DataFrame({"A": [1, 2, 3], "B": [4, 5, 6]})
df.attrs.update(name="dummy", foo="bar") # type error here

Issue Description

ty 0.0.1-alpha.18 (d697cc092 2025-08-14) raises a type error:

Argument to bound method update is incorrect: Expected Mapping[str, Any], found dict[Hashable, Any]tyinvalid-argument-type

Expected Behavior

changing to

- df.attrs.update(name="dummy", foo="bar")
+ df.attrs.update({"name": "dummy", "foo": "bar"})

resolves the type error. both work at run time and i'd expect both to type check fine

Installed Versions

INSTALLED VERSIONS

commit : c888af6
python : 3.13.0
python-bits : 64
OS : Darwin
OS-release : 24.6.0
Version : Darwin Kernel Version 24.6.0: Mon Jul 14 11:30:40 PDT 2025; root:xnu-11417.140.69~1/RELEASE_ARM64_T6041
machine : arm64
processor : arm
byteorder : little
LC_ALL : None
LANG : en_US.UTF-8
LOCALE : en_US.UTF-8

pandas : 2.3.1
numpy : 2.3.2
pytz : 2025.2
dateutil : 2.9.0.post0
pip : 25.2
Cython : 3.0.12
sphinx : 8.1.3
IPython : 9.4.0
adbc-driver-postgresql: None
adbc-driver-sqlite : None
bs4 : 4.13.3
blosc : None
bottleneck : None
dataframe-api-compat : None
fastparquet : None
fsspec : 2025.5.1
html5lib : 1.1
hypothesis : None
gcsfs : None
jinja2 : 3.1.6
lxml.etree : 6.0.0
matplotlib : 3.10.5
numba : None
numexpr : 2.10.2
odfpy : None
openpyxl : 3.1.5
pandas_gbq : None
psycopg2 : 2.9.10
pymysql : 1.4.6
pyarrow : 19.0.1
pyreadstat : None
pytest : 8.4.0
python-calamine : None
pyxlsb : None
s3fs : None
scipy : 1.16.1
sqlalchemy : None
tables : 3.10.2
tabulate : 0.9.0
xarray : None
xlrd : None
xlsxwriter : None
zstandard : 0.24.0
tzdata : 2025.2
qtpy : None
pyqt5 : None

[rhshadrach]

ty is in alpha and raises many false positives. Do you experience the same with other type checkers? If so report back and we can reconsider. Closing for now.