Tuya - overrule Tuya device category

[titiviking]

The problem

Vendor improperly set the device category. This makes it listed as "unsupported" by HA Tuya integration (category: qt).

How can the category be overruled so that it can be used?
other (non-tuya) alarm systems can be integrated, so I guess it should not be rocket science for Tuya to provide similar integration...

What version of Home Assistant Core has the issue?

2024.5.3

What was the last working version of Home Assistant Core?

No response

What type of installation are you running?

Home Assistant OS

Integration causing the issue

tuya

Link to integration documentation on our website

https://www.home-assistant.io/integrations/tuya/

Diagnostics information

tuya-85d86f6a2262968323baced6b4fc3fbb-Home Alarm-8d7115dd2a0bb2703bd8036d1477ce52.json

Example YAML snippet

No response

Anything in the logs that might be useful for us?

No response

Additional information

No response

[home-assistant]

Hey there @tuya, @zlinoliver, @frenck, mind taking a look at this issue as it has been labeled with an integration (tuya) you are listed as a code owner for? Thanks!

Code owner commands

Code owners of tuya can trigger bot actions by commenting:

• @home-assistant close Closes the issue.
• @home-assistant rename Awesome new title Renames the issue.
• @home-assistant reopen Reopen the issue.
• @home-assistant unassign tuya Removes the current integration label and assignees on the issue, add the integration domain after the command.
• @home-assistant add-label needs-more-information Add a label (needs-more-information, problem in dependency, problem in custom component) to the issue.
• @home-assistant remove-label needs-more-information Remove a label (needs-more-information, problem in dependency, problem in custom component) on the issue.

_{^{(message by CodeOwnersMention)}}

---

tuya documentation
tuya source
_{^{(message by IssueLinks)}}

[iantrobinson]

I also have this problem with my device. It should be a mmwave presence sensor but it is coded as a switch. I fixed the configuration manually in another addon but it would be nice to have it run natively.

localtuya-6a93607c50a3e9fcffe6f15792b17283-Basement High-precision breath sensor 24G-879246042808a98462ceb71bc864507d.json

[titiviking]

Would love to have that option, but Local Tuya doesn't support Alarm yet...

[adotagarwal]

This is also an issue for me, I have a multisensor (pid yrr3eiyiacm31ski) for air quality and it currently registers in Tuya cloud as co2bj which in HomeAssistant only exposes CO2.

However, after looking at the definitions in the official tuya integration, I believe this category: dgnbj would be a better fit, as it exposes all of the same sensors that this 8-in-1 device does

I would like to be able to override this, as I can see in the debug json that all of the values are being transmitted & available

[frenck]

How can the category be overruled so that it can be used?

It cannot. qt is used by Tuya for legacy devices. As far as I am aware, Tuya will never make them available via their cloud services.

This also shows in your provided diagnostic, as that contains the raw data we get from Tuya:

    "function": {},
    "status_range": {},
    "status": {},

I'm going to close this issue on this end, as there is nothing we can do. Please, reach out to Tuya for this case.

../Frenck

[iantrobinson]

I also have this problem with my device. It should be a mmwave presence sensor but it is coded as a switch. I fixed the configuration manually in another addon but it would be nice to have it run natively.

What about my situation. My code is not qt. It shows up as a switch instead of a mmWave sensor. I've uploaded the file above.

[frenck]

What about my situation.

Sorry, I'm having troubles understanding how that is related to this issue? If you have a different issue, why is stacked in this issue?

../Frenck

[iantrobinson]

Sorry, I'm having troubles understanding how that is related to this issue?

I thought it was related because the problem was that the codes are wrong. But now that I read it again, his code is actually correct and obsolete. In my case my code is wrong and not obsolete. I'll make another issue then.