list_trades_all vs list_all_rfqs — two *_all naming conventions coexist in the same SDK #349

Problem

When a list method has a noun suffix, two patterns coexist in this codebase: list_X paired with list_all_X (communications.list_rfqs / list_all_rfqs, communications.list_quotes / list_all_quotes, subaccounts.list_transfers / list_all_transfers) and list_X paired with list_X_all (markets.list_trades / list_trades_all). Both shapes appear in user-facing docs.

Consequence: a caller who learned the SDK on CommunicationsResource reaches for client.markets.list_all_trades(...) and gets AttributeError. It is also a documentation footgun — docs/resources/index has both spellings within a few rows of each other.

Evidence

• kalshi/resources/markets.py:339,360 — list_trades / list_trades_all (suffix _all).
• kalshi/resources/communications.py:213,241,334,374 — list_rfqs / list_all_rfqs, list_quotes / list_all_quotes (prefix _all_).
• kalshi/resources/subaccounts.py:157,175 — list_transfers / list_all_transfers (prefix _all_).

Suggested fix

Standardize on list_all_<noun> (the form used by three of the four resources). Rename markets.list_trades_all → list_all_trades on sync + async, add a one-version deprecation alias (@typing_extensions.deprecated) that forwards to the new name, and update docs/resources/markets.md. Add a regression test that imports both the old and new names and asserts the deprecation warning fires.

Source

Round-3 independent audit (reviewer: resources_api).