Bug Report: Dynamic API Keys Cannot Create Documents with User-Specific Permissions

Reproduction Steps

1. Create an Appwrite function (note: not triggered by a user)
2. Initialize client with dynamic API key parsed from x-appwrite-key header
3. Set function scopes to include documents.write
4. Try to create a document with user-specific permissions:

await databases.create_document(
  database_id,
  collection_idd,
  ID.unique(),
  data,
  [Permission.read(Role.user(user_id))] # This fails with dynamic keys
)

5. Create a manual API key with documents.write scope
6. Use manual API key with same code - it works

Expected Behavior

Dynamic API keys with documents.write scope should have identical capabilities to manual API keys with the same scope.

Actual Behavior

• Dynamic API key: Fails with user_unauthorized, Permissions must be one of: (any, guests)
• Manual API key: Successfully creates documents with Permission.read(Role.user(userId))

Environment

• Platform: Appwrite version 1.7.4
• SDK: Python SDK version 11.1.0
• Function Runtime: Python 3.9
• Collection: Document security enabled

Additional Context

Discord community evidence:

• https://discord.com/channels/564160730845151244/1333457180149678251/1333457180149678251: User with dynamic key fails, manual API key with documents.write works. Appwrite member: "still not sure why the function scopes didn't work"
• https://discord.com/channels/564160730845151244/1345011727451947120/1345011727451947120: Another user reports identical error: "Permissions must be one of: (any, guests)" with dynamic key having full database scope

Note: This issue has been reported multiple times in the community but the root cause of this inconsistency between dynamic and manual API keys has not been addressed. The underlying problem of why keys with identical scopes behave differently remains unresolved.

Current workaround: Create manual API key with documents.write scope, but this defeats the benefits of using dynamic keys.