[Components] remote_retrieval #12998 #13716
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
3 Skipped Deployments
|
|
Important Review skippedReview was skipped due to path filters ⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
CodeRabbit blocks several paths by default. You can override this behavior by explicitly including those paths in the path filters. For example, including You can disable this status message by setting the WalkthroughThe changes introduce new actions for order management within the Remote Retrieval application, specifically for creating and retrieving orders. A new module for creating orders has been added, along with modules for retrieving order details and lists of orders. Additionally, two existing modules for retrieving pending and specific orders have been removed. The modifications enhance the application's ability to manage order data effectively through structured input and asynchronous operations. Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
components/remote_retrieval/actions/get-new-orders/get-new-orders.mjs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…ers.mjs Co-authored-by: Luan Cazarine <luanhc@gmail.com>
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
components/remote_retrieval/actions/get-order-details/get-order-details.mjs (1)
6-6: LGTM!The description clearly explains the purpose of the action and includes a helpful link to the API documentation for the order detail endpoint.
Consider adding a brief description of the key information returned in the order details, such as the order status, items, and shipping details, to give users a better understanding of what to expect from the API response.
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files ignored due to path filters (1)
pnpm-lock.yamlis excluded by!**/pnpm-lock.yaml
Files selected for processing (10)
- components/remote_retrieval/actions/create-order/create-order.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/remote_retrieval/actions/get-completed-orders/get-completed-orders.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/remote_retrieval/actions/get-new-orders/get-new-orders.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/remote_retrieval/actions/get-order-details/get-order-details.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/remote_retrieval/actions/get-orders/get-orders.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/remote_retrieval/actions/get-pending-orders/get-pending-orders.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/remote_retrieval/actions/get-specific-order/get-specific-order.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/remote_retrieval/common/constants.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/remote_retrieval/package.json (2 hunks)
- components/remote_retrieval/remote_retrieval.app.mjs (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (3)
- components/remote_retrieval/actions/get-pending-orders/get-pending-orders.mjs
- components/remote_retrieval/actions/get-specific-order/get-specific-order.mjs
- components/remote_retrieval/package.json
Additional comments not posted (38)
components/remote_retrieval/common/constants.mjs (1)
1-9: LGTM! The new constants provide a more structured approach.The introduction of
EQUIPMENT_TYPESandORDER_TYPESconstants is a good change that can help maintain consistency and avoid typos in the codebase. Consider using these constants for validation or selection within the application logic.Verify that the removal of the previous constants (
BASE_URL,VERSION_PATH,DEFAULT_MAX) does not break any existing functionality. Run the following script to search for their usage in the codebase:Verification successful
Removal of constants appears safe, but manual verification recommended
Based on the thorough search of the codebase, it appears that the removal of the constants
BASE_URL,VERSION_PATH, andDEFAULT_MAXfromcomponents/remote_retrieval/common/constants.mjsis safe and doesn't impact other parts of the codebase. No direct usage or imports of these constants were found.However, as a precautionary measure, I recommend a manual verification of the changes, particularly in areas of the codebase that deal with remote retrieval functionality. This will ensure that no edge cases or dynamically generated references were missed by the automated search.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Search for usage of the removed constants in the codebase. # Test: Search for the constant names. Expect: No occurrences. rg --type js $'BASE_URL|VERSION_PATH|DEFAULT_MAX'Length of output: 339
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Search for partial matches of the removed constants and imports of the constants file. # Search for partial matches of the constant names echo "Searching for partial matches of removed constants:" rg --type js -i '(base.*url|version.*path|default.*max)' # Search for imports of the constants file echo -e "\nSearching for imports of the constants file:" rg --type js 'import.*from.*components/remote_retrieval/common/constants'Length of output: 2030
components/remote_retrieval/actions/get-orders/get-orders.mjs (4)
1-2: LGTM!The import statement is syntactically correct and follows the expected pattern for importing an app instance from a separate file within the same component.
3-11: LGTM!The exported object follows the expected structure for defining an action, with appropriate metadata properties. The inclusion of the API documentation link in the description is helpful for users. The app instance is correctly included in the props.
12-18: LGTM!The async run method is well-structured and follows best practices:
- It correctly destructures the $ object from the input context.
- It calls the getOrders method with the expected arguments.
- It exports a helpful summary message for user feedback.
- It returns the full API response for flexibility in handling the retrieved data.
19-19: LGTM!The exported object is correctly closed with a semicolon.
components/remote_retrieval/actions/get-new-orders/get-new-orders.mjs (3)
1-2: LGTM!The import statement is correct and the imported
appobject is used appropriately in the file.
3-17: LGTM!The exported object follows the expected structure and includes the correct properties.
Apply the following suggestion from the past review comment:
description: "Get a list of new orders. [See the documentation](https://www.remoteretrieval.com/api-documentation/#new-orders)",
18-27: LGTM!The
runmethod is correctly defined and calls thegetNewOrdersmethod with the appropriate parameters. The summary message is exported correctly and the response is returned.components/remote_retrieval/actions/get-order-details/get-order-details.mjs (4)
1-2: LGTM!The import statement is correctly defined and the
appmodule is likely to be used in the action definition.
3-17: LGTM!The exported object is well-defined with appropriate properties for the action. The
propsdefinition correctly includes the requiredappandorderIdproperties, with theorderIdproperty referencing the definition from theappmodule.
18-27: LGTM!The
runmethod is well-implemented as an asynchronous function. It correctly calls thegetOrderDetailsfunction with the appropriate parameters, exports a summary message upon successful retrieval, and returns the response data from the API call.
25-25: LGTM!The exported summary message provides useful information about the successful retrieval of order details and includes the
orderIdto identify the specific order.components/remote_retrieval/actions/get-completed-orders/get-completed-orders.mjs (4)
1-8: LGTM!The import statement and the exported object metadata are well-structured and follow the conventions. The metadata provides clear and concise information about the action, including a link to the relevant API documentation.
9-17: LGTM!The
propsobject is well-structured and follows the conventions. Thepageproperty is correctly defined using thepropDefinitionarray, which references theappmodule and the"page"key.
18-27: LGTM!The
runmethod is well-structured and follows the conventions. The method correctly calls thegetCompletedOrdersmethod from theappmodule, passing the required arguments. The summary message is exported using$.export, and the API response is returned, allowing further processing or display of the completed orders.
1-28: Excellent work!The
get-completed-orders.mjsfile is a complete and well-structured action that follows the conventions and best practices. The action is well-documented, modular, reusable, and testable. It includes all the necessary components, such as the import statement, exported object metadata,propsobject, andrunmethod. The code is clean, concise, and easy to understand. Great job!components/remote_retrieval/remote_retrieval.app.mjs (20)
8-22: LGTM!The property name change and the updated
optionsmethod improve clarity and provide more relevant data.
23-28: LGTM!The new property adds a useful field to capture the type of equipment, and the options are fetched from a constants file, which is a good practice.
29-34: LGTM!The new property adds a useful field to capture the type of order, and the options are fetched from a constants file, which is a good practice.
35-39: LGTM!The new property adds a useful field to capture the employee email address.
40-44: LGTM!The new property adds a useful field to capture the employee full name.
45-49: LGTM!The new property adds a useful field to capture the employee address line 1.
50-55: LGTM!The new optional property adds a useful field to capture the employee address line 2 when available.
56-60: LGTM!The new property adds a useful field to capture the employee city.
61-65: LGTM!The new property adds a useful field to capture the employee state.
66-70: LGTM!The new property adds a useful field to capture the employee country.
71-75: LGTM!The new property adds a useful field to capture the employee zip code.
76-80: LGTM!The new property adds a useful field to capture the employee phone number.
81-85: LGTM!The new property adds a useful field to capture the company person name.
86-90: LGTM!The new property adds a useful field to capture the company name.
91-95: LGTM!The new property adds a useful field to capture the company address line 1.
96-101: LGTM!The new optional property adds a useful field to capture the company address line 2 when available.
102-106: LGTM!The new property adds a useful field to capture the company city.
107-111: LGTM!The new property adds a useful field to capture the company state.
112-116: LGTM!The new property adds a useful field to capture the company country.
117-121: LGTM!The new property adds a useful field to capture the company zip code.
components/remote_retrieval/actions/create-order/create-order.mjs (2)
3-137: LGTM!The action definition looks good:
- The
key,name,description,version, andtypeproperties are properly defined.- The
propsproperty defines a comprehensive set of input properties for collecting order details.- The input properties are defined using the
propDefinitionproperty, which references theappobject and the corresponding property name.
139-199: LGTM!The
runmethod looks good:
- The method logs the input property values to the console for debugging purposes.
- The method calls the
createOrdermethod of theappobject, passing the input property values as data.- The data is structured correctly, with the employee information and company information nested within the order object.
- The method exports a summary message indicating the successful creation of the order.
- The method returns the response from the
createOrdermethod, allowing the caller to handle the result of the order creation process.
|
/approve |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 4
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
components/remote_retrieval/actions/get-orders/get-orders.mjs (1)
12-18: Consider implementing pagination handlingThe current implementation fetches all orders at once, which could cause performance issues with large datasets. Consider:
- Adding pagination parameters
- Implementing cursor-based pagination if supported by the API
- Adding a limit parameter to control result size
components/remote_retrieval/actions/create-order/create-order.mjs (2)
35-70: Consider refactoring address structureThe current implementation duplicates address field definitions for both employee and return addresses. Consider creating a reusable address prop structure to reduce duplication.
+ const createAddressProps = (prefix = '') => ({ + [`${prefix}AddressLine1`]: { + propDefinition: [app, "addressLine1"], + }, + [`${prefix}AddressLine2`]: { + propDefinition: [app, "addressLine2"], + }, + // ... other address fields + }); export default { props: { app, // ... other props - addressLine1: { - propDefinition: [app, "addressLine1"], - }, - // ... other address fields + ...createAddressProps(), + ...createAddressProps('return'), }, }Also applies to: 89-124
197-197: Enhance success message with order detailsThe current success message is too generic. Include relevant order details in the summary.
- $.export("$summary", "Successfully created order"); + $.export("$summary", `Successfully created order for ${this.name} (${this.email})`);
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
components/remote_retrieval/actions/create-order/create-order.mjs(1 hunks)components/remote_retrieval/actions/get-order-details/get-order-details.mjs(1 hunks)components/remote_retrieval/actions/get-orders/get-orders.mjs(1 hunks)components/remote_retrieval/actions/get-pending-orders/get-pending-orders.mjs(0 hunks)components/remote_retrieval/actions/get-specific-order/get-specific-order.mjs(0 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (2)
- components/remote_retrieval/actions/get-pending-orders/get-pending-orders.mjs
- components/remote_retrieval/actions/get-specific-order/get-specific-order.mjs
| async run({ $ }) { | ||
| const response = await this.app.getOrders({ | ||
| $, | ||
| }); | ||
| $.export("$summary", `Successfully retrieved ${response.results.length} orders`); | ||
| return response; | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Add error handling
The run method should include proper error handling to provide meaningful feedback when API calls fail.
async run({ $ }) {
+ try {
const response = await this.app.getOrders({
$,
});
$.export("$summary", `Successfully retrieved ${response.results.length} orders`);
return response;
+ } catch (error) {
+ $.export("$summary", `Failed to retrieve orders: ${error.message}`);
+ throw error;
+ }
},📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| async run({ $ }) { | |
| const response = await this.app.getOrders({ | |
| $, | |
| }); | |
| $.export("$summary", `Successfully retrieved ${response.results.length} orders`); | |
| return response; | |
| }, | |
| async run({ $ }) { | |
| try { | |
| const response = await this.app.getOrders({ | |
| $, | |
| }); | |
| $.export("$summary", `Successfully retrieved ${response.results.length} orders`); | |
| return response; | |
| } catch (error) { | |
| $.export("$summary", `Failed to retrieve orders: ${error.message}`); | |
| throw error; | |
| } | |
| }, |
| async run({ $ }) { | ||
| const response = await this.app.getOrderDetails({ | ||
| $, | ||
| params: { | ||
| ORDER_ID: this.orderId, | ||
| }, | ||
| }); | ||
| $.export("$summary", `Successfully retrieved details of order with ID '${this.orderId}'`); | ||
| return response; | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add error handling and input validation
The run method needs proper error handling and input validation:
- Validate orderId format before API call
- Handle API errors gracefully
- Consider adding request timeout
async run({ $ }) {
+ if (!this.orderId) {
+ throw new Error("Order ID is required");
+ }
+ try {
const response = await this.app.getOrderDetails({
$,
params: {
ORDER_ID: this.orderId,
},
});
$.export("$summary", `Successfully retrieved details of order with ID '${this.orderId}'`);
return response;
+ } catch (error) {
+ $.export("$summary", `Failed to retrieve order details: ${error.message}`);
+ throw error;
+ }
},📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| async run({ $ }) { | |
| const response = await this.app.getOrderDetails({ | |
| $, | |
| params: { | |
| ORDER_ID: this.orderId, | |
| }, | |
| }); | |
| $.export("$summary", `Successfully retrieved details of order with ID '${this.orderId}'`); | |
| return response; | |
| }, | |
| async run({ $ }) { | |
| if (!this.orderId) { | |
| throw new Error("Order ID is required"); | |
| } | |
| try { | |
| const response = await this.app.getOrderDetails({ | |
| $, | |
| params: { | |
| ORDER_ID: this.orderId, | |
| }, | |
| }); | |
| $.export("$summary", `Successfully retrieved details of order with ID '${this.orderId}'`); | |
| return response; | |
| } catch (error) { | |
| $.export("$summary", `Failed to retrieve order details: ${error.message}`); | |
| throw error; | |
| } | |
| }, |
| console.log({ | ||
| typeOfEquipment: this.typeOfEquipment, | ||
| orderType: this.orderType, | ||
| email: this.email, | ||
| name: this.name, | ||
| addressLine1: this.addressLine1, | ||
| addressLine2: this.addressLine2, | ||
| addressCity: this.addressCity, | ||
| addressState: this.addressState, | ||
| addressCountry: this.addressCountry, | ||
| addressZip: this.addressZip, | ||
| phone: this.phone, | ||
| returnPersonName: this.returnPersonName, | ||
| returnCompanyName: this.returnCompanyName, | ||
| returnAddressLine1: this.returnAddressLine1, | ||
| returnAddressLine2: this.returnAddressLine2, | ||
| returnAddressCity: this.returnAddressCity, | ||
| returnAddressState: this.returnAddressState, | ||
| returnAddressCountry: this.returnAddressCountry, | ||
| returnAddressZip: this.returnAddressZip, | ||
| companyEmail: this.companyEmail, | ||
| companyPhone: this.companyPhone, | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Remove debug console.log statement
The console.log statement contains sensitive PII (email, phone, address) and should be removed from production code. Consider using proper logging levels if debugging is needed.
- console.log({
- typeOfEquipment: this.typeOfEquipment,
- orderType: this.orderType,
- // ... removed for brevity
- });| const response = await this.app.createOrder({ | ||
| $, | ||
| data: { | ||
| orders: [ | ||
| { | ||
| type_of_equipment: this.typeOfEquipment, | ||
| order_type: this.orderType, | ||
| employee_info: { | ||
| email: this.email, | ||
| name: this.name, | ||
| address_line_1: this.addressLine1, | ||
| address_line_2: this.addressLine2 || "", | ||
| address_city: this.addressCity, | ||
| address_state: this.addressState, | ||
| address_country: this.addressCountry, | ||
| address_zip: this.addressZip, | ||
| phone: this.phone, | ||
| }, | ||
| company_info: { | ||
| return_person_name: this.returnPersonName, | ||
| return_company_name: this.returnCompanyName, | ||
| return_address_line_1: this.returnAddressLine1, | ||
| return_address_line_2: this.returnAddressLine2 || "", | ||
| return_address_city: this.returnAddressCity, | ||
| return_address_state: this.returnAddressState, | ||
| return_address_country: this.returnAddressCountry, | ||
| return_address_zip: this.returnAddressZip, | ||
| email: this.companyEmail, | ||
| phone: this.companyPhone, | ||
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| ], | ||
| }, | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add input validation and error handling
The order creation lacks proper validation and error handling:
- Required fields should be validated
- Address format should be validated
- Email and phone formats should be verified
- API errors should be handled gracefully
async run({ $ }) {
+ // Validate required fields
+ const requiredFields = ['email', 'name', 'addressLine1', 'addressCity', 'addressState'];
+ for (const field of requiredFields) {
+ if (!this[field]) {
+ throw new Error(`${field} is required`);
+ }
+ }
+
+ // Validate email format
+ if (!/^[^\s@]+@[^\s@]+\.[^\s@]+$/.test(this.email)) {
+ throw new Error('Invalid email format');
+ }
+
+ try {
const response = await this.app.createOrder({
// ... existing code
});
$.export("$summary", "Successfully created order");
return response;
+ } catch (error) {
+ $.export("$summary", `Failed to create order: ${error.message}`);
+ throw error;
+ }
},Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
|
/approve |
WHY
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Removed Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation