docs(iobroker): clarify rest-api adapter requires webInstance config

[github-actions]

fixes #33087

The IOBROKER meter template always builds requests as /rest-api/v1/state/<state>/plain. This path only exists when the ioBroker rest-api adapter is configured with a webInstance (e.g. web.0) and is thereby served through the ioBroker Web Adapter. Without that, the rest-api adapter's own port serves /v1/state/... directly (no /rest-api/ prefix), so evcc's requests return 404 while the endpoint itself works fine outside evcc.

This adds a note to the German and English template descriptions clarifying that webInstance must be set and that the Web Adapter's host/port must be used as the evcc URI.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[sourcery-ai]

Hey - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!

Sourcery assessment

Approved.

---

Sourcery is free for open source - if you like our reviews please consider sharing them ✨

• X
• Mastodon
• LinkedIn
• Facebook

_{Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.}

[andig]

@kscholty I would have expected this to have been resolved by now, but apparently it isn't?

[andig]

@kscholty I would have expected this to have been resolved by now, but apparently it isn't? Worse, this is apparently

• confusing and unexpected for users and
• inconsistent since the BMW integration does it directly

We can either

• do it consistently everywhere
• and/or drop BMW since we have a nice EUDA solution meanwhile
• drop ioBroker alltogether if there's no working generic config

Which would you prefer? Happy to take a PR.

[kscholty]

I'm happy to help, but I don't get the point. I recently created 2 PRs to change the documentation to make this point clear. #32816 was not merged, while #32817 was. So the charger has been corrected, while the meter has not.

What does BMW have to do with that and what do you mean with "directly"? Can you point me to a resource that explains that point?

There are two ways to set up the rest adapter. Either stand-alone or as an extension to the Web adapter.
Depending on that decision the urls are slightly different. Current implementation assumes the second (in my mind more common) setup.
We can certainly implement something that works with both setups, but that would complicate the temple significantly. Let me know if that's what you want.

[andig]

Ah, thought this was a duplicate: #32816 (comment). Never got a response after that.

What does BMW have to do with that and what do you mean with "directly"? Can you point me to a resource that explains that point?

Sure: https://github.com/evcc-io/evcc/blob/master/templates/definition/vehicle/ioBroker.bmw.yaml

This has existed for a long time and never got any issues regarding the URL.

There are two ways to set up the rest adapter. Either stand-alone or as an extension to the Web adapter.
Depending on that decision the urls are slightly different. Current implementation assumes the second (in my mind more common) setup.

I get that. It does however seem as if the "web adapter extension" is more surprising than the other variant?