New Components - Docnify #14203
New Components - Docnify #14203
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎ 1 Skipped Deployment
|
|
@rickafds is attempting to deploy a commit to the Pipedreamers Team on Vercel. A member of the Team first needs to authorize it. |
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces several new modules for the Docnify application, enhancing its functionality with actions for adding recipients to documents, creating documents from templates, sending documents for signing, and managing document events. Each module includes metadata and core asynchronous methods that interact with the Docnify API, allowing users to perform operations related to document management effectively. Changes
Assessment against linked issues
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Poem
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI ⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (4)
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 (
|
|
Thank you so much for submitting this! We've added it to our backlog to review, and our team has been notified. |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 6
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (25)
components/docnify/sources/new-document-created/test-event.mjs (1)
1-12: LGTM! The test event structure looks appropriate.The exported object correctly represents a document creation event for Docnify, with all expected fields present and using appropriate data types. The "PENDING" status aligns well with the null
completedAtfield, providing a realistic test scenario.Consider adding a descriptive comment.
To enhance clarity and maintainability, consider adding a comment at the beginning of the file explaining the purpose of this test event and its role in the Docnify integration.
Here's a suggested comment to add at the beginning of the file:
// Test event representing a newly created document in Docnify // This is used for testing the "new document created" trigger in the Docnify integrationConsider expanding test data coverage.
While this test event is valid and useful, consider adding more varied test data or multiple test events to cover different scenarios (e.g., completed documents, documents with external IDs, etc.). This could help ensure the integration handles various cases correctly.
Would you like assistance in generating additional test events?
components/docnify/sources/new-document-completed/test-event.mjs (3)
1-12: Consider enhancing the test event data for better coverage.The structure of the test event object is well-formed and includes relevant properties for a completed document. However, consider the following suggestions to improve its representativeness:
- The
externalIdis currently null. Consider providing a non-null value to test scenarios where external IDs are used.- The
teamIdis also null. If team-based documents are supported, it might be beneficial to include a validteamIdin the test event.- The
titlesuggests a PDF file, which is good. Consider adding a comment explaining why this specific file name was chosen, or provide multiple test events with different file types.These enhancements would provide more comprehensive test coverage for various scenarios that might occur in real-world usage.
Would you like me to propose an enhanced version of this test event object?
9-11: Timestamp logic is sound, consider additional test cases.The timestamp properties (
createdAt,updatedAt, andcompletedAt) are logically consistent and provide a realistic representation of a document's lifecycle. The time difference between creation and completion adds authenticity to the test event.However, to enhance test coverage, consider creating additional test event objects with varying timestamp scenarios, such as:
- A case where
updatedAtdiffers fromcompletedAt, representing intermediate updates before completion.- Edge cases like documents completed very quickly or after a long period.
This would help ensure that the component handles various real-world scenarios correctly.
1-12: Overall, the test event structure is well-designed but could benefit from expanded test coverage.This test event file provides a good foundation for testing the new-document-completed source in the Docnify component. The object structure accurately represents a completed document with relevant properties including identifiers, metadata, and timestamps.
To further enhance the testing capabilities:
- Consider creating multiple test event objects to cover various scenarios (e.g., different file types, team-based documents, varying timestamp patterns).
- Ensure that all possible ID formats and values are represented in the test suite.
- Add comments explaining the choice of specific values or formats where relevant.
These additions would contribute to more robust testing and help catch edge cases in the component's behavior.
As you continue developing this component, consider creating a test event generator function that can produce a variety of test events with different properties. This would allow for more dynamic and comprehensive testing scenarios.
components/docnify/sources/new-document-created/new-document-created.mjs (2)
4-11: LGTM: Component definition is well-structured and follows best practices.The component is properly defined with clear and concise properties. The key, name, and description accurately represent the component's purpose. The use of "source" type and "unique" dedupe strategy is appropriate for this event source.
Consider implementing a versioning strategy for future updates. While "0.0.1" is suitable for the initial version, you may want to establish guidelines for incrementing the version number as the component evolves.
17-23: LGTM: generateMeta method is well-implemented, but consider adding error handling.The
generateMetamethod effectively creates a metadata object for the emitted event. The use ofthis.getTsField()ensures consistency with the defined timestamp field.Consider adding error handling to account for potential missing properties in the doc object. For example:
generateMeta(doc) { if (!doc || !doc.id) { throw new Error("Invalid document: missing id"); } const tsField = this.getTsField(); if (!(tsField in doc)) { throw new Error(`Invalid document: missing ${tsField}`); } return { id: doc.id, summary: `New Document Created: ${doc.id}`, ts: Date.parse(doc[tsField]), }; }This will provide more informative errors if the document structure is unexpected.
components/docnify/sources/new-document-completed/new-document-completed.mjs (3)
4-11: LGTM: Well-structured component metadata.The component metadata is well-defined and follows Pipedream's best practices. The key, name, type, and dedupe strategy are all appropriate.
Consider enhancing the description to provide more context:
- description: "Emit new event when a document is signed by all recipients.", + description: "Emit new event when a Docnify document is completed (signed by all recipients).",This change clarifies that the component is specifically for Docnify documents.
17-19: LGTM: Correct implementation of isRelevant method.The
isRelevantmethod correctly checks if the document status is "COMPLETED", which aligns with the component's purpose.Consider adding a null check to improve robustness:
isRelevant(doc) { - return doc.status === "COMPLETED"; + return doc && doc.status === "COMPLETED"; },This change prevents potential errors if
docis undefined or null.
20-26: LGTM: Well-implemented generateMeta method.The
generateMetamethod correctly generates the required metadata for the emitted event. The use ofthis.getTsField()is a good practice for consistency.Consider enhancing the summary to include more context:
generateMeta(doc) { return { id: doc.id, - summary: `New Document Completed: ${doc.id}`, + summary: `Docnify Document Completed: ${doc.id}`, ts: Date.parse(doc[this.getTsField()]), }; },This change makes it clear that the event is specifically for a Docnify document.
components/docnify/actions/send-document/send-document.mjs (4)
3-8: LGTM: Action metadata is well-defined.The action metadata is comprehensive and follows a good structure. The inclusion of the API documentation link in the description is particularly helpful.
Consider adding a brief example of when this action might be used in the description to provide more context for users.
9-17: Props definition looks good, but consider adding validation.The props are well-structured, and the use of
propDefinitionfordocumentIdis a good practice for maintaining consistency and reusability.Consider adding validation or additional properties to the
documentIdprop, such as:
- A regular expression pattern to ensure the ID format is correct
- A
descriptionfield to provide more context about what thedocumentIdrepresents- An
optionalfield if the ID can be omitted in some casesExample:
documentId: { propDefinition: [ docnify, "documentId", ], description: "The unique identifier of the document to be sent for signing.", optional: false, // Add any additional validation as needed },
18-28: Run method is structured well, but could benefit from added flexibility and error handling.The asynchronous structure and use of Pipedream's
$object for exporting the summary are good practices.Consider the following improvements:
- Make the
sendEmailoption configurable:props: { // ... existing props sendEmail: { type: "boolean", label: "Send Email", description: "Whether to send an email notification", default: true, }, },
- Add error handling:
async run({ $ }) { try { const response = await this.docnify.sendDocumentForSigning({ $, documentId: this.documentId, data: { sendEmail: this.sendEmail, }, }); $.export("$summary", `Document with ID ${this.documentId} sent successfully.`); return response; } catch (error) { $.export("$summary", `Failed to send document with ID ${this.documentId}`); throw error; } },These changes will make the action more flexible and robust.
1-29: Overall, the implementation meets the PR objectives and follows best practices.This new Docnify action successfully implements the functionality to send documents for signing, addressing the need outlined in issue #14201. The component structure adheres to Pipedream's standards and integrates well with the Docnify API.
Key strengths:
- Clear and descriptive metadata
- Proper use of prop definitions
- Asynchronous execution with Pipedream's
$objectSuggested improvements:
- Enhanced prop validation
- Configurable email sending option
- Robust error handling
These enhancements would further improve the component's flexibility and reliability.
As you continue to develop Docnify components, consider creating a common utilities file for shared functions and constants. This will promote code reuse across different Docnify actions and triggers.
components/docnify/actions/add-recipient-to-document/add-recipient-to-document.mjs (3)
3-8: LGTM: Action metadata is well-definedThe action metadata is correctly structured and provides clear information about the component's purpose and functionality. However, there's a small issue with the documentation link in the description.
Please fix the documentation link in the description. It appears to be duplicated. Change:
description: "Add a recipient to an existing Docnify document. [See the documentation]([See the documentation](https://app.docnify.io/api/v1/openapi))",to:
description: "Add a recipient to an existing Docnify document. [See the documentation](https://app.docnify.io/api/v1/openapi)",
9-27: LGTM: Props are well-defined, consider adding email validationThe props are correctly defined and cover the necessary inputs for adding a recipient to a document. Good job on using the prop definition for 'documentId' from the docnify app, which ensures consistency.
Consider adding email format validation for the 'email' prop to ensure valid email addresses are provided. You can use a regular expression or a dedicated email validation function. Here's an example of how you could modify the 'email' prop:
email: { type: "string", label: "Email", description: "Email address of the recipient", validate: (value) => { const emailRegex = /^[^\s@]+@[^\s@]+\.[^\s@]+$/; if (!emailRegex.test(value)) { return "Please enter a valid email address"; } }, },This addition will help prevent invalid email addresses from being submitted.
28-41: LGTM: Run method is well-implemented, consider adding role flexibilityThe run method is correctly implemented and follows the expected pattern for Pipedream actions. Good job on using the '$' context for making API calls and providing a clear summary message.
Consider the following improvements:
Add flexibility for the recipient role:
Instead of hardcoding the role as "SIGNER", you could add a new prop to allow users to specify the role. This would make the action more versatile if Docnify supports multiple recipient roles. For example:// In props: role: { type: "string", label: "Recipient Role", description: "The role of the recipient (e.g., SIGNER, VIEWER)", default: "SIGNER", options: ["SIGNER", "VIEWER"], // Add all supported roles }, // In run method: role: this.role,Error handling:
Add try-catch block to handle potential errors from the API call. This will provide more informative error messages to the user. For example:async run({ $ }) { try { const response = await this.docnify.addRecipientToDocument({ // ... existing code ... }); $.export("$summary", `Successfully added recipient to document ${this.documentId}`); return response; } catch (error) { throw new Error(`Failed to add recipient: ${error.message}`); } },These changes would enhance the flexibility and robustness of the action.
components/docnify/actions/create-document-from-template/create-document-from-template.mjs (3)
3-8: LGTM: Action metadata is well-defined.The metadata for this action is clear and informative. The key, name, and type are appropriate for the action being implemented. The version number correctly indicates that this is the initial implementation.
Consider enhancing the description by mentioning that this action creates a new document based on a pre-existing template in Docnify. This would provide more context about the action's functionality.
9-35: LGTM: Props are well-defined with clear descriptions.The props definition covers the necessary parameters for creating a document from a template. The use of
propDefinitionfortemplateIdis good practice, likely providing a dropdown or dynamic selection for the user.For consistency, consider adding a description to the
docnifyprop, similar to the other props. This would provide clarity on its purpose within the action.
1-54: Great job implementing the Docnify "Create Document From Template" action!This implementation aligns well with the PR objectives of integrating the Docnify service into the Pipedream platform. The code is clean, well-structured, and follows good practices. It provides the necessary functionality to create a document from a pre-existing template in Docnify, which directly addresses the user's need mentioned in the linked issue #14201.
The action's props and run method are well-implemented, providing users with the flexibility to override template fields when necessary. This should enable users to effectively incorporate Docnify into their workflows, as requested.
As you continue to develop Docnify components, consider creating reusable utility functions for common operations or data transformations. This will enhance maintainability and consistency across different Docnify actions and triggers.
components/docnify/sources/new-document-signed/new-document-signed.mjs (1)
12-16: Consider renaming thegetTsFieldmethod for clarity.The method name
getTsFieldis a bit ambiguous. Consider renaming it to something more descriptive likegetTimestampFieldto clearly convey its purpose of returning the timestamp field name.- getTsField() { + getTimestampField() { return "updatedAt"; },components/docnify/sources/common/base.mjs (2)
16-18: Consider handling the case when thelastTskey is missing in the database.The current implementation defaults to 0 when the
lastTskey is not found in the database. However, it might be beneficial to differentiate between a missing key and an intentional 0 value.Consider applying this diff to handle the missing key case explicitly:
_getLastTs() { - return this.db.get("lastTs") || 0; + const lastTs = this.db.get("lastTs"); + return lastTs !== undefined ? lastTs : 0; },
4-63: Add JSDoc comments to document the module's purpose, properties, and methods.The module lacks documentation comments, which can make it difficult for other developers to understand its purpose and usage. Add JSDoc comments to describe the module, its exported properties, and its methods.
Here's an example of how you can document the module:
/** * Module for integrating with the Docnify application. * Provides functionality for managing document retrieval and state persistence. * * @module components/docnify/sources/common/base * @requires docnify * @requires @pipedream/platform */ export default { /** * Module properties. * * @property {Object} docnify - The Docnify application module. * @property {string} db - The database service connection. * @property {Object} timer - The timer configuration for polling. */ props: { // ... }, /** * Module methods. */ methods: { /** * Retrieves the last timestamp from the database. * * @returns {number} The last timestamp or 0 if not found. */ _getLastTs() { // ... }, // ... }, /** * Runs the document retrieval process. * * @async */ async run() { // ... }, };components/docnify/docnify.app.mjs (3)
45-47: Consider using an environment variable for the base URL.To make the code more flexible and easier to maintain, consider using an environment variable for the base URL instead of hardcoding it. This way, if the base URL changes in the future, you only need to update the environment variable instead of modifying the code.
- _baseUrl() { - return `${this.$auth.url}/api/v1`; - }, + _baseUrl() { + return process.env.DOCNIFY_BASE_URL || `${this.$auth.url}/api/v1`; + },
82-90: Consider adding validation for required parameters.The
createDocumentFromTemplatemethod assumes that thetemplateIdis provided. To improve the robustness of the code, consider adding validation to ensure that required parameters are present before making the API request.createDocumentFromTemplate({ templateId, ...opts }) { + if (!templateId) { + throw new Error("Missing required parameter: templateId"); + } return this._makeRequest({ method: "POST", path: `/templates/${templateId}/generate-document`, ...opts, }); },
1-110: Excellent job on this PR!This PR successfully implements the Docnify app integration, providing a solid foundation for users to interact with templates and documents through the Pipedream platform. The code is clean, well-organized, and follows best practices. The minor suggestions provided are aimed at further enhancing the robustness and maintainability of the code. Once the suggested verifications are completed, this PR should be ready to merge.
If you need any assistance with the suggested improvements or have any questions, feel free to reach out. I'm happy to help!
📜 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 (12)
- components/docnify/actions/add-recipient-to-document/add-recipient-to-document.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/docnify/actions/create-document-from-template/create-document-from-template.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/docnify/actions/send-document/send-document.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/docnify/docnify.app.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/docnify/package.json (1 hunks)
- components/docnify/sources/common/base.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/docnify/sources/new-document-completed/new-document-completed.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/docnify/sources/new-document-completed/test-event.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/docnify/sources/new-document-created/new-document-created.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/docnify/sources/new-document-created/test-event.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/docnify/sources/new-document-signed/new-document-signed.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/docnify/sources/new-document-signed/test-event.mjs (1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- components/docnify/package.json
🔇 Additional comments (22)
components/docnify/sources/new-document-completed/test-event.mjs (1)
2-5: Review ID property formats for comprehensive testing.The variety of ID formats in the test event object likely reflects the actual data structure of the Docnify service. However, consider the following points to ensure comprehensive testing:
- The use of numeric IDs for
idanduserIdis noted. Ensure that the component can handle very large numeric IDs if applicable in the production environment.- The
teamIdis currently null. If team-based operations are supported in Docnify, consider adding test events with non-nullteamIdvalues to cover those scenarios.- The
documentDataIduses a different format (string) compared to other IDs. Ensure that the component correctly handles and processes this ID format.To improve test coverage, consider creating multiple test event objects with different combinations of ID values, including edge cases (e.g., very large numeric IDs, various
documentDataIdformats).To verify the usage of these ID properties across the codebase, you can run the following script:
This script will help identify how these ID properties are used across the Docnify component, ensuring consistent handling and revealing any potential issues with type casting or parsing.
Also applies to: 8-8
components/docnify/sources/new-document-created/new-document-created.mjs (4)
1-2: LGTM: Imports are appropriate and well-structured.The import statements are concise and relevant to the component's functionality. The use of relative imports and the separation of the test event into a separate file demonstrate good code organization.
12-13: LGTM: Methods object is well-structured.The methods object appropriately extends the common methods and adds custom methods specific to this component. This structure promotes code reuse while allowing for component-specific functionality.
25-25: LGTM: Inclusion of sampleEmit is a good practice.The inclusion of
sampleEmitin the component is excellent. It provides a way to test the component and serves as documentation for the expected event structure. Keeping it in a separate file helps maintain a clean and organized codebase.
1-26: Overall implementation is solid and aligns well with PR objectives.This new Docnify source component for detecting new document creation events is well-structured and implements the necessary functionality. It successfully addresses the integration of Docnify service as requested in the linked issue #14201.
Key points:
- The component extends a common base, promoting code reuse.
- It includes appropriate methods for generating metadata and identifying the timestamp field.
- The inclusion of a sample emit facilitates testing and documentation.
While the implementation is generally good, consider the suggestions made in previous comments to enhance flexibility and error handling. These minor improvements will make the component more robust and maintainable in the long run.
Great job on delivering this new integration! It should provide users with the ability to incorporate Docnify events into their Pipedream workflows as requested.
components/docnify/sources/new-document-completed/new-document-completed.mjs (4)
1-2: LGTM: Appropriate imports for the component.The import statements are correct and follow best practices for ES modules. Importing the common base and sample event emitter is appropriate for this Pipedream component.
14-16: LGTM: Correct implementation of getTsField method.The
getTsFieldmethod correctly returns "updatedAt", which is likely the field used for tracking document updates in Docnify. This aligns with common practices for timestamp fields.
28-28: LGTM: Proper inclusion of sampleEmit.The inclusion of
sampleEmitin the exported object is a good practice. It provides a sample event for testing and documentation purposes, which is crucial for component development and usage.
1-29: Great job on implementing the Docnify component!The implementation of the Docnify "New Document Completed" source component is well-structured and aligns perfectly with the PR objectives. It correctly extends the common base, includes all necessary methods, and follows Pipedream's best practices for component development.
Key strengths:
- Clear and concise component metadata
- Proper implementation of required methods (getTsField, isRelevant, generateMeta)
- Inclusion of sampleEmit for testing and documentation
The minor suggestions provided in the review comments will further enhance the component's robustness and clarity. Overall, this is a solid implementation that successfully integrates Docnify as a source component in Pipedream.
components/docnify/actions/send-document/send-document.mjs (1)
1-1: LGTM: Import statement is correct.The import statement for the Docnify app is properly structured and uses a relative path, which is a good practice for maintaining modularity.
components/docnify/actions/add-recipient-to-document/add-recipient-to-document.mjs (2)
1-1: LGTM: Import statement is correctThe import statement correctly imports the 'docnify' app file from the expected relative path.
1-42: Overall assessment: Well-implemented Docnify action with room for minor enhancementsThis new Docnify action for adding a recipient to a document is well-structured and follows Pipedream's component development best practices. The implementation is solid and achieves the intended functionality as outlined in the linked issue #14201.
Key strengths:
- Clear and descriptive metadata
- Well-defined props with appropriate use of propDefinitions
- Correct implementation of the run method using the Pipedream context
Suggested enhancements:
- Fix the duplicated text in the documentation link
- Add email format validation for the 'email' prop
- Consider adding flexibility for the recipient role
- Implement error handling in the run method
These enhancements will further improve the component's robustness and user-friendliness. Great job on this implementation!
components/docnify/actions/create-document-from-template/create-document-from-template.mjs (2)
1-1: LGTM: Import statement is correct.The import statement correctly references the Docnify app configuration file using a relative path.
36-53: LGTM: Run method implementation is correct and efficient.The
runmethod correctly implements the document creation process using the Docnify API. The use of optional chaining forsubjectandmessagein the meta object is a good practice.
- Consider adding a comment explaining why the
recipientsarray is empty. If it's intentional, it might be worth mentioning in a code comment.- The
metaobject could be simplified using object shorthand notation:meta: this.subject || this.message ? { subject: this.subject, message: this.message } : undefined,To ensure the
createDocumentFromTemplatemethod is correctly implemented in the Docnify app, let's verify its existence:✅ Verification successful
Verification Successful:
createDocumentFromTemplatemethod exists indocnify.app.mjs.The
createDocumentFromTemplatemethod is properly implemented in the Docnify app, confirming that the review comment's concern is addressed.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Verify the existence of createDocumentFromTemplate method in docnify.app.mjs ast-grep --lang javascript --pattern 'createDocumentFromTemplate($$$) { $$$ }' components/docnify/docnify.app.mjsLength of output: 577
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Verify the existence of createDocumentFromTemplate method in docnify.app.mjs with a refined pattern ast-grep --lang javascript --pattern 'createDocumentFromTemplate($_* )' components/docnify/docnify.app.mjsLength of output: 108
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Verify the existence of createDocumentFromTemplate method in docnify.app.mjs using ripgrep rg -w 'createDocumentFromTemplate\s*\(' components/docnify/docnify.app.mjsLength of output: 109
components/docnify/sources/new-document-signed/new-document-signed.mjs (4)
4-11: LGTM!The exported object properties are well-defined and follow the expected structure for a Pipedream source.
17-24: Verify theisRelevantmethod handles missing data gracefully.The
isRelevantmethod assumes that therecipientsarray andsignedAtproperty exist. It's important to handle cases where this data might be missing to avoid potential errors.Run the following script to verify the handling of missing data:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the `isRelevant` method handles missing data gracefully. # Test 1: Check if the method handles a missing `recipients` array. Expect: No error thrown. ast-grep --lang javascript --pattern $'async isRelevant(doc, lastTs) { $$$ const recentlySigned = recipients ?.filter(({ signedAt }) => signedAt && Date.parse(signedAt) >= lastTs); $$$ }' # Test 2: Check if the method handles a missing `signedAt` property. Expect: No error thrown. ast-grep --lang javascript --pattern $'async isRelevant(doc, lastTs) { $$$ const recentlySigned = recipients ?.filter(({ signedAt }) => signedAt && Date.parse(signedAt) >= lastTs); $$$ }'If the tests pass without throwing errors, the method handles missing data gracefully. If not, consider adding appropriate checks or default values.
38-38: Verify thesampleEmitfunction is implemented correctly.Ensure that the
sampleEmitfunction exported fromtest-event.mjsis implemented correctly and emits a valid sample event for testing purposes.Run the following script to verify the
sampleEmitfunction:
1-2: Verify the imported modules are available and correct.Ensure that the
common/base.mjsandtest-event.mjsmodules exist and export the expected functionality.Run the following script to verify the imports:
components/docnify/sources/common/base.mjs (1)
1-2: Verify the import paths are correct.Ensure that the relative import paths for
docnify.app.mjsand@pipedream/platformare correct and the files exist at the specified locations.Run the following script to verify the import paths:
✅ Verification successful
Import paths are correct.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the import paths are correct. # Test: Check if the `docnify.app.mjs` file exists. Expect: File found. if [ ! -f "components/docnify/docnify.app.mjs" ]; then echo "ERROR: components/docnify/docnify.app.mjs not found" exit 1 fi # Test: Check if the `@pipedream/platform` package is installed. Expect: Package found. if ! fd -e json -x cat {} \; | rg $'"@pipedream/platform"' &>/dev/null; then echo "ERROR: @pipedream/platform package not found" exit 1 fi echo "Import paths are correct"Length of output: 168
components/docnify/docnify.app.mjs (3)
1-110: Excellent work on the Docnify app integration!The code is well-structured, follows best practices, and provides a comprehensive set of methods to interact with the Docnify API. The use of
propDefinitionsfortemplateIdanddocumentIdwith asyncoptionsmethods is a great way to provide a user-friendly interface for selecting templates and documents. The_makeRequestmethod is a clean and reusable way to handle API requests with authentication. Overall, this is a solid implementation that fulfills the requirements outlined in the linked issue.
100-108: Verify the structure of theoptsparameter inaddRecipientToDocument.The
addRecipientToDocumentmethod passes theoptsobject directly to the_makeRequestmethod. Verify that the structure of theoptsobject matches the expected payload structure required by the Docnify API for adding a recipient to a document.You can use the following script to search for examples of how the
addRecipientToDocumentmethod is being called:#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the structure of the `opts` parameter in `addRecipientToDocument`. # Test: Search for calls to `addRecipientToDocument`. Expect: The `opts` parameter matches the API payload structure. rg --type javascript -A 5 $'addRecipientToDocument\('
48-61: Verify error handling in_makeRequest.The
_makeRequestmethod looks good, but it's important to ensure that it handles errors appropriately. Verify that errors from the API are caught and propagated correctly to the calling code.You can use the following script to check if the
_makeRequestmethod is being called within a try-catch block in other methods:
components/docnify/sources/new-document-created/new-document-created.mjs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 17
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (16)
components/docnify/sources/new-document-signed/test-event.mjs (1)
2-8: Consider adding more test events for edge casesWhile this test event is good, consider creating additional test events to cover more scenarios:
- Different document statuses (e.g., "COMPLETED", "REJECTED").
- Various file types (not just PDF).
- Edge cases for
idanduserId(e.g., very large numbers).- Cases where optional fields like
externalIdandteamIdare not null.This will help ensure the component handles a wide range of possible inputs correctly.
components/docnify/sources/new-document-completed/test-event.mjs (1)
1-1: Add a comment explaining the purpose of this file.Consider adding a brief comment at the beginning of the file to explain its purpose. This can help other developers understand the context and usage of this test event.
Here's a suggested comment to add:
// Test event for the "new document completed" source in Docnify integration. // This represents a sample payload of a completed document event.components/docnify/sources/new-document-created/new-document-created.mjs (2)
4-11: LGTM: Well-structured component definition with a minor suggestion.The component definition follows Pipedream's guidelines:
- The key follows the correct format.
- Version is appropriately set for a new component.
- Type and dedupe are correctly specified.
Consider expanding the description to provide more context about what constitutes a "new document" in Docnify. For example:
description: "Emit new event when a new document is created in Docnify.",
17-23: LGTM: Well-structured metadata generation with a suggestion for date parsing.The
generateMetamethod follows Pipedream's guideline of emitting a summary with events. It's good that you're using thegetTsFieldmethod for consistency.Consider using a more robust date parsing method to handle various date formats. For example:
generateMeta(doc) { const tsField = this.getTsField(); return { id: doc.id, summary: `New Document Created: ${doc.id}`, ts: new Date(doc[tsField]).getTime(), }; }This approach will handle a wider range of date formats and will return a numeric timestamp.
components/docnify/sources/new-document-completed/new-document-completed.mjs (1)
4-11: LGTM: Component configuration follows Pipedream guidelines.The component configuration is well-structured and follows Pipedream's guidelines:
- Unique key with the correct format
- Descriptive name
- Appropriate version for a new component
- Correct type and deduplication strategy
Consider expanding the description to provide more context about when the event is emitted, e.g., "Emit new event when a document is completed (signed by all recipients) in Docnify."
components/docnify/actions/send-document/send-document.mjs (2)
3-8: LGTM: Component metadata is well-defined.The component metadata follows the Pipedream guidelines:
- The key follows the correct format.
- The name and description are clear.
- The version and type are appropriate.
Minor suggestion:
Consider adding a brief explanation of what "sending for signing" means in the context of Docnify to make the description more informative for users unfamiliar with the service.
1-29: Overall, the component is well-implemented with room for enhancements.The Docnify "Send Document" action is functional and follows Pipedream's component development guidelines. Here's a summary of the review:
- The import and component metadata are correctly defined.
- Props are properly structured, but could be expanded for more flexibility.
- The run method implements the core functionality but lacks error handling.
Next steps to improve this component:
- Add more props as suggested (recipients, signingOrder, expirationDays, sendEmail).
- Implement error handling in the run method.
- Make the
sendEmailoption configurable.- Consider adding input validation for the
documentIdand any new props.- Add unit tests to ensure the component behaves correctly under various scenarios.
These enhancements will make the component more robust, flexible, and user-friendly.
components/docnify/actions/add-recipient-to-document/add-recipient-to-document.mjs (3)
1-8: LGTM! Minor suggestion for the description.The import statement and action metadata look good and follow Pipedream guidelines. Great job including a link to the documentation in the description!
Consider updating the description to remove the duplicate "[See the documentation]" text:
- description: "Add a recipient to an existing Docnify document. [See the documentation]([See the documentation](https://app.docnify.io/api/v1/openapi))", + description: "Add a recipient to an existing Docnify document. [See the documentation](https://app.docnify.io/api/v1/openapi)",
9-27: LGTM! Consider adding input validation.The props are well-defined and follow Pipedream guidelines. Good job using propDefinition for documentId and providing clear labels and descriptions for name and email.
Consider adding input validation for the email prop to ensure it's a valid email address. You can use a regular expression or a validation library. Here's an example using a simple regex:
email: { type: "string", label: "Email", description: "Email address of the recipient", + pattern: "^[a-zA-Z0-9._%+-]+@[a-zA-Z0-9.-]+\\.[a-zA-Z]{2,}$", + errorMessage: "Please enter a valid email address", },
39-41: LGTM! Consider enhancing the summary message.Exporting a summary and returning the response is good practice. Well done!
Consider enhancing the summary message to include the recipient's email for more clarity:
- $.export("$summary", `Successfully added recipient to document ${this.documentId}`); + $.export("$summary", `Successfully added recipient (${this.email}) to document ${this.documentId}`);components/docnify/actions/create-document-from-template/create-document-from-template.mjs (3)
1-8: LGTM! Consider enhancing the description.The import statement and component metadata are well-structured and follow Pipedream guidelines. Good job including the API documentation link in the description.
Consider adding a brief explanation of what a template is in the context of Docnify to make the description more informative for users who might be unfamiliar with the service.
9-35: LGTM! Consider adding a label to the templateId prop.The props are well-defined and documented, following Pipedream guidelines. Good job using propDefinition for templateId and providing clear descriptions for optional props.
For consistency, consider adding a
labelfield to thetemplateIdprop, similar to the other props. This would improve the user interface when using this action.
36-50: LGTM! Consider adding error handling and optimizing the data object.The run method is well-structured and correctly uses the Docnify app to create a document from a template.
Consider the following improvements:
- Add error handling to catch and handle potential API errors gracefully.
- Remove the empty recipients array if it's not required by the API.
- Optimize the data object construction to avoid unnecessary properties.
Here's a suggested refactor:
async run({ $ }) { const data = { title: this.title, }; if (this.subject || this.message) { data.meta = { ...(this.subject && { subject: this.subject }), ...(this.message && { message: this.message }), }; } try { const response = await this.docnify.createDocumentFromTemplate({ $, templateId: this.templateId, data, }); $.export("$summary", `Successfully created document with ID: ${response.documentId}`); return response; } catch (error) { $.export("$summary", `Failed to create document: ${error.message}`); throw error; } }components/docnify/sources/common/base.mjs (3)
4-14: Ensure the exported properties are correctly defined.The exported properties
docnify,db, andtimerare correctly defined. However, consider adding JSDoc comments to document their purpose and any constraints.Apply this diff to add JSDoc comments:
export default { props: { + /** + * The Docnify app instance. + */ docnify, + /** + * The database service for storing state. + */ db: "$.service.db", + /** + * The timer configuration for polling. + */ timer: { type: "$.interface.timer", default: { intervalSeconds: DEFAULT_POLLING_SOURCE_TIMER_INTERVAL, }, }, },
16-18: Handle potentialundefinedvalue.The
_getLastTs()method may returnundefinedif thelastTskey is not found in the database. Consider explicitly returning0instead of relying on the||operator to handle this case.Apply this diff to handle the potential
undefinedvalue:_getLastTs() { - return this.db.get("lastTs") || 0; + const lastTs = this.db.get("lastTs"); + return lastTs !== undefined ? lastTs : 0; },
1-63: Consider adding unit tests.To ensure the correctness and maintainability of the code, consider adding unit tests for the exported methods, especially
_getLastTs(),_setLastTs(),isRelevant(),generateMeta(), andrun(). This will help catch any potential bugs and regressions in the future.Do you need assistance in setting up a testing framework or writing unit tests for this module? I can provide guidance and examples to help you get started.
📜 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 (12)
- components/docnify/actions/add-recipient-to-document/add-recipient-to-document.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/docnify/actions/create-document-from-template/create-document-from-template.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/docnify/actions/send-document/send-document.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/docnify/docnify.app.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/docnify/package.json (1 hunks)
- components/docnify/sources/common/base.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/docnify/sources/new-document-completed/new-document-completed.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/docnify/sources/new-document-completed/test-event.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/docnify/sources/new-document-created/new-document-created.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/docnify/sources/new-document-created/test-event.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/docnify/sources/new-document-signed/new-document-signed.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/docnify/sources/new-document-signed/test-event.mjs (1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- components/docnify/package.json
🔇 Additional comments (23)
components/docnify/sources/new-document-signed/test-event.mjs (2)
1-12: Well-structured test event object. Good job!The test event object is well-structured and follows good practices:
- It includes essential properties for a document signing event.
- It uses appropriate data types for each property.
- Optional fields (externalId, teamId, completedAt) are correctly set to null.
- Timestamps are in the standard ISO 8601 format.
- The status "PENDING" is consistent with a new, unsigned document.
This test event will be valuable for testing the new-document-signed source component.
1-1: Correct use of ECMAScript modules and default exportThe use of the
.mjsextension and default export is correct and aligns with modern JavaScript practices and Pipedream's component development guidelines. This approach ensures compatibility and ease of import in the Pipedream environment.components/docnify/sources/new-document-completed/test-event.mjs (1)
1-12: LGTM: Test event object structure is appropriate.The test event object provides a comprehensive representation of a completed document, including relevant identifiers, metadata, and timestamps. The structure aligns well with the expected data for a "new document completed" event in the Docnify application.
components/docnify/sources/new-document-created/new-document-created.mjs (3)
1-2: LGTM: Appropriate imports for a Pipedream component.The imports from the common base and test event file are in line with Pipedream's component development guidelines. Good job on utilizing a common base, which promotes code reuse and consistency.
12-13: LGTM: Good use of common methods.Incorporating methods from the common base promotes code reuse and consistency across components, which is a best practice in Pipedream component development.
25-25: LGTM: Good inclusion of sample emit.Including a sample emit is excellent for testing and documentation purposes. This aligns well with Pipedream's component development best practices.
components/docnify/sources/new-document-completed/new-document-completed.mjs (5)
1-2: LGTM: Imports are appropriate and use modern JavaScript syntax.The imports for the common base and sample emit are correctly implemented using ES module syntax (.mjs extension). This aligns with modern JavaScript practices and Pipedream's component structure.
17-19: LGTM: isRelevant method correctly checks document status.The
isRelevantmethod appropriately checks if a document's status is "COMPLETED", which aligns with the component's purpose of emitting events for completed documents.
20-26: LGTM: generateMeta method constructs appropriate metadata.The
generateMetamethod correctly constructs an object with the document's ID, a summary string, and a parsed timestamp. It uses thegetTsFieldmethod to retrieve the timestamp field, which is good for consistency.
28-28: LGTM: Sample emit is correctly included.The inclusion of a
sampleEmitin the component is a good practice. It provides a way to test the component and serves as documentation for the event structure. Separating it into a different file (test-event.mjs) promotes better code organization and maintainability.
1-29: Overall, well-implemented Docnify source component.This new source component for Docnify is well-structured and follows Pipedream's guidelines and best practices. It correctly implements the required methods and configuration for emitting events when documents are completed in Docnify.
A few minor suggestions for improvement have been made, particularly regarding the flexibility of the
getTsFieldmethod. However, these are not critical issues, and the component should function as intended.To ensure the component works as expected, please run the following verification steps:
- Test the component with sample data to confirm it correctly identifies completed documents.
- Verify that the emitted events contain the expected metadata.
- Check that the deduplication strategy works correctly for repeated events.
These checks will help ensure the component is implemented correctly and handles various scenarios appropriately.
✅ Verification successful
Verified: Docnify source component implementation is correct.
The
isRelevantmethod incomponents/docnify/sources/new-document-completed/new-document-completed.mjsis correctly implemented and functions as intended by checking ifdoc.status === "COMPLETED". Additionally, there are nothrow new Errorstatements in the file, ensuring no unexpected error handling is introduced.The component adheres to Pipedream's guidelines and best practices, and all reviewed aspects have been satisfactorily verified.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Verify the implementation of the isRelevant method ast-grep --lang javascript --pattern $'isRelevant(doc) { return doc.status === "COMPLETED"; }' # Check for proper error handling in the component rg --type javascript 'throw new Error' # Ensure the component is exported correctly rg --type javascript 'export default'Length of output: 727
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Corrected pattern to match the isRelevant method ast-grep --lang javascript --pattern $'method isRelevant($doc) { return $doc.status === "COMPLETED"; }' # Use the correct file type identifier for JavaScript rg --type js 'throw new Error' # Ensure the component is exported correctly rg --type js 'export default'Length of output: 1509
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Locate the specific file under review fd new-document-completed.mjs # Corrected pattern to match the isRelevant method within the specific file ast-grep --lang javascript --pattern $'export default { $$$ methods: { $$$ isRelevant(doc) { return doc.status === "COMPLETED"; } $$$ }, $$$ }' # Use rg to search for 'throw new Error' within the specific file rg --type js 'throw new Error' components/docnify/sources/new-document-completed/new-document-completed.mjs # Use rg to ensure 'export default' is correctly used in the specific file rg --type js 'export default' components/docnify/sources/new-document-completed/new-document-completed.mjsLength of output: 598
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for the isRelevant method in the specific docnify file and display its implementation rg -A 5 'isRelevant(doc)' components/docnify/sources/new-document-completed/new-document-completed.mjs # Verify the implementation of the getTsField method in the specific file rg -A 5 'getTsField()' components/docnify/sources/new-document-completed/new-document-completed.mjs # Confirm that there are no throw statements in the specific file rg --type js 'throw new Error' components/docnify/sources/new-document-completed/new-document-completed.mjsLength of output: 527
components/docnify/actions/send-document/send-document.mjs (1)
1-1: LGTM: Import statement is correct.The import statement follows the Pipedream component structure and correctly imports the
docnifyinstance.components/docnify/actions/add-recipient-to-document/add-recipient-to-document.mjs (1)
28-28: LGTM! Correct method signature.The
runmethod is correctly defined as an async function with the expected parameter structure.components/docnify/actions/create-document-from-template/create-document-from-template.mjs (2)
51-53: LGTM! Good job on providing user feedback.The summary export and return statement are well-implemented. Exporting a clear summary message with the document ID provides excellent user feedback, and returning the full response allows for further processing if needed.
1-54: Overall, excellent implementation with room for minor enhancements.This new Docnify action for creating a document from a template is well-structured and follows Pipedream component development guidelines. The code is clear, concise, and includes good documentation.
Main points for improvement:
- Enhance the component description for better user understanding.
- Add a label to the templateId prop for consistency.
- Implement error handling in the run method.
- Optimize the data object construction in the run method.
Great job on this implementation! These minor enhancements will further improve the component's robustness and user-friendliness.
components/docnify/sources/new-document-signed/new-document-signed.mjs (5)
1-2: LGTM!The imports are correctly specified and follow the expected naming conventions.
4-11: LGTM!The module exports an object with the required properties such as
key,name,description,version,type, anddedupe. The values are appropriately set and follow the guidelines.
12-16: LGTM!The
getTsFieldmethod correctly returns the string "updatedAt" to indicate the timestamp field to be used for deduplication.
38-38: LGTM!The
sampleEmitproperty is correctly imported and assigned to provide a sample event for testing purposes.
17-24: Verify the behavior when no recipients have signed the document.The
isRelevantmethod checks if any recipients of a specified document have signed it since a given timestamp (lastTs). It retrieves the document's recipients and filters them based on theirsignedAtdate, returning a boolean indicating the presence of recently signed documents.However, it's important to verify the behavior when no recipients have signed the document or when the
recipientsarray is empty.Run the following script to verify the behavior:
components/docnify/docnify.app.mjs (3)
3-110: Excellent work on the Docnify app module!The module structure and functionality look great. The exported object correctly specifies the app type and includes well-defined property definitions for
templateIdanddocumentId. The async options functions for these properties effectively retrieve lists of templates and documents from the Docnify API.The methods for interacting with the Docnify API are well-organized and utilize the
_makeRequestfunction to handle API calls consistently. The specific methods cover essential functionality such as listing templates and documents, retrieving documents, creating documents from templates, sending documents for signing, and adding recipients to documents.Overall, the module adheres to best practices and provides a solid foundation for integrating the Docnify application into the Pipedream platform.
48-61: Excellent implementation of the_makeRequestmethod.The
_makeRequestmethod is well-structured and handles the common logic for making API requests. It accepts anoptsobject that allows for customization of the request path and other options.The use of object destructuring to extract the
$andpathvariables, along with the spread operator to capture the remaining options, is a clean and concise approach.The method constructs the complete URL by combining the base URL from
_baseUrl()with the providedpath. It also sets the necessary headers, including the authorization token from the$authobject.Overall, this method provides a reusable and centralized way to make API requests throughout the module.
1-2: Verify the import statement.Ensure that the
axioslibrary is correctly imported from the@pipedream/platformpackage. If the package is not installed or the import path is incorrect, it may lead to runtime errors.Run the following script to verify the import:
components/docnify/sources/new-document-created/new-document-created.mjs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
components/docnify/sources/new-document-created/new-document-created.mjs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
components/docnify/sources/new-document-completed/new-document-completed.mjs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
Hi everyone, all test cases are passed! Ready for release! Test report |
WHY
Resolves #14201
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
Documentation
@pipedream/docnifywith version0.1.0.Chores