Why does this FR10 argument exist on only one laptop?

Different copies indeed. Old machine loads from the job folder, new machine from its environment. Thanks, that saved more random reinstalling

Compare the argument names accepted by those copies. Also establish the source and version of the working folder before deciding whether reproducing that environment or adapting the script is the appropriate change.

Does the shortcut use the same environment as your terminal? We have seen that difference in another laptop discussion, and it can make a repaired terminal test irrelevant to how operators launch the job.

Shortcut and terminal both use the same one here. The old folder accepts the argument, installed copy doesn't. Can't find a version label on the old folder yet

Look for the original supplied archive or the handover message that accompanied it. A known working folder is worth preserving, but it should not become an unexplained dependency in the next handover.

Our controller guide came in an email attachment with the revision in the filename, while the extracted folder just said SDK. Do you still have the delivery email?

Purchasing has the original attachments. Looking there now

Don't edit the argument out just to make the error go away. Find which interface you meant to use first.

Found the archive. Supplier identified it against our controller setup in the same email. The files match the working job copy

Glad purchasing kept it. Are you keeping that source message with the rebuilt setup notes?

I would first reproduce the documented working environment for the existing read-only check, while preserving the current failed environment for comparison. Migrating to another SDK version can then be assessed separately if needed.

Doing that. Notes now identify the archive and import path, plus the interpreter. No script edits so far

Get someone else to follow the notes. You already know where all the hidden bits live.

And use the normal launch shortcut for the final check. That was my concern earlier, even though the environments currently match.

Colleague rebuilt it from the notes and got past the argument check through the shortcut. Controller check is booked for the test slot

Record the read-only response shape as well as success, so you verify that the existing parser receives the interface it was written for.

Was the original archive still available from the supplier too, or only in purchasing's mailbox?

Make sure your team has its own approved copy either way. Email search is a rotten recovery tool at midnight.

Read-only check passed, response handled correctly. Supplier confirmed the archive, and we've kept an approved local copy with the setup notes. That was a lot of fuss for code that hadn't changed