Hi all,
Has anyone had any trouble getting the following error:
hubspot.crm.contacts.exceptions.ApiTypeError: Got an unexpected keyword argument ‘properties_with_history’ to method get_by_id
I am using the following page: Accounts Dashboard | HubSpot
I test the inputs within the documentation and get the response I needed with the code below (Access token hidden for obvious reasons 
) but when copying and running in Pycharm the get by ID method does not seem to accept the properties with the history parameter.
I instead get this error saying it does not expect it:
Any guidance would be great!
Hi, @dwhittington 
Hey, @JBeatty @taran42, do you have any experience here? Thank you! — Jaycee
I hit similar problem, expect in the opposite direction (i.e. worked fine in Jupyter Notebook but fell over when I used in custom code block with a HubSpot workflow).
I think it’s maybe something to do with the the way I’m creating the HubSpot client object, but I’m again finding the HS API documentation rather frustrating.
I solved this by falling back to using GET request with API key authorisation, then adding the parameter propertiesWithHistory=desired_property as suggested in this old post. Essentially:
client = hubspot.Client.create(access_token="YOUR_ACCESS_TOKEN")
api_response = client.crm.contacts.basic_api.get_by_id(contact_id="contactId", properties=["propertyName"], properties_with_history=["propertyName"], archived=False)
Becomes:
headers = {
'accept': 'application/json',
'content-type': 'application/json',
"authorization": f"Bearer {YOUR_ACCESS_TOKEN}"
}
url = f'https://api.hubapi.com/crm/v3/objects/contacts/{contactId}?propertiesWithHistory=propertyName'
response = requests.request("GET", url, headers=headers)
Which will return json object rather than the weird hubspot public object thingy. I’m not sure how this would work if you were hoping for multiple properties with history.
I also had the idea of batch reading, because it too has a propertyWithHistory argument in the method, but it appears you can only search by contact email and not by Record ID.
Hopefully someone else has a better idea than this though!
