Hubspot actions - support end user auth #14958
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
|
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces several enhancements across various HubSpot action files, focusing on the addition of the Changes
Assessment against linked issues
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Poem
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (3)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (2)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
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 (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 8
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (10)
components/hubspot/actions/update-contact/update-contact.mjs (1)
3-3: LGTM: Common auth props import aligns with end user auth supportThe addition of
appPropimport centralizes authentication-related properties, which is a good architectural decision for supporting end user authentication across HubSpot actions.components/hubspot/actions/update-lead/update-lead.mjs (1)
Line range hint
1-28: Architecture suggestion for error handlingGiven that this component handles lead updates and now supports end-user authentication, consider adding explicit error handling for authentication failures.
Consider adding a try-catch block in the common update object implementation to handle potential authentication errors and provide clear error messages to end users.
components/hubspot/actions/update-custom-object/update-custom-object.mjs (1)
Line range hint
1-34: Architecture recommendation: Document the property inheritance patternThe refactoring to support end-user auth through
common-app-prop.mjsis well-structured. Consider adding documentation that explains:
- The purpose and scope of
common-app-prop.mjs- The property inheritance hierarchy (appProp → component-specific → common)
- Guidelines for adding new properties to prevent conflicts
This will help maintain consistency as more HubSpot actions are updated to support end-user auth.
components/hubspot/actions/search-crm/search-crm.mjs (4)
48-61: Consider logging errors in catch blocks for better debuggingIn the
additionalPropsmethod, the catch block handling errors when fetching custom object types is currently empty. Logging the error message can aid in troubleshooting issues during runtime.Apply this diff to log the error:
try { props.customObjectType = { type: "string", label: "Custom Object Type", options: await this.getCustomObjectTypes(), reloadProps: true, }; } catch (error) { + console.error("Error fetching custom object types:", error); props.customObjectType = { type: "string", label: "Custom Object Type", reloadProps: true, }; }
69-86: Add error logging when fetching schema failsIn the
additionalPropsmethod, when an error occurs while fetching the schema, consider logging the error to assist with debugging.Apply this diff to log the error:
try { schema = await this.hubspot.getSchema({ objectType, }); props.searchProperty = { type: "string", label: "Search Property", description: "The field to search", options: schema.searchableProperties, }; } catch (error) { + console.error("Error fetching schema:", error); props.searchProperty = { type: "string", label: "Search Property", description: "The field to search", }; }
102-129: Log errors when retrieving additional properties failsWhen attempting to retrieve additional properties, logging the error in the catch block will help identify issues during property retrieval.
Apply this diff to log the error:
try { // eslint-disable-next-line pipedream/props-description props.additionalProperties = { type: "string[]", label: "Additional properties to retrieve", optional: true, options: async ({ page }) => { if (page !== 0) { return []; } const { results: properties } = await this.hubspot.getProperties({ objectType: this.customObjectType ?? this.objectType, }); const defaultProperties = this.getDefaultProperties(); return properties.filter(({ name }) => !defaultProperties.includes(name)) .map((property) => ({ label: property.label, value: property.name, })); }, }; } catch (error) { + console.error("Error fetching additional properties:", error); props.additionalProperties = { type: "string[]", label: "Additional properties to retrieve", optional: true, }; }
133-155: Include error logging when generating creation propertiesIn the
additionalPropsmethod, if an error occurs while generatingcreationProps, logging the error will facilitate debugging.Apply this diff to log the error:
try { const { results: properties } = await this.hubspot.getProperties({ objectType, }); const relevantProperties = properties.filter(this.isRelevantProperty); const propDefinitions = []; for (const property of relevantProperties) { propDefinitions.push(await this.makePropDefinition(property, schema.requiredProperties)); } creationProps = propDefinitions .reduce((props, { name, ...definition }) => { props[name] = definition; return props; }, {}); } catch (error) { + console.error("Error generating creation properties:", error); props.creationProps = { type: "object", label: "Object Properties", description: "A JSON object containing the object to create if not found", }; }components/hubspot/actions/create-engagement/create-engagement.mjs (2)
56-60: Consider adding JSON schema validation.The new
objectPropertiesproperty provides good flexibility for custom engagement properties. However, consider adding JSON schema validation to prevent invalid property submissions.objectProperties: { type: "object", label: "Object Properties", description: "Enter the `engagement` properties as a JSON object", + validate: (value) => { + try { + if (typeof value === "string") { + JSON.parse(value); + } + return true; + } catch (e) { + return "Invalid JSON format"; + } + }, },
98-102: Consider adding type safety checks.While the properties handling logic is sound, consider adding explicit type checks for better error handling.
const properties = objectProperties ? typeof objectProperties === "string" ? JSON.parse(objectProperties) : objectProperties + ? typeof objectProperties === "object" && objectProperties !== null + ? objectProperties + : throw new Error("objectProperties must be a valid object or JSON string") : otherProperties;components/hubspot/actions/common/common-create.mjs (1)
115-147: Consider enhancing error handling specificity.The error handling is good but could be more specific to help with debugging.
try { const schema = await this.hubspot.getSchema({ objectType, }); const { results: properties } = await this.hubspot.getProperties({ objectType, }); // ... rest of the try block - } catch { + } catch (error) { + console.error(`Failed to fetch properties for ${objectType}:`, error.message); if (existingProps.propertyGroups) { existingProps.propertyGroups.optional = true; } return {}; }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
pnpm-lock.yamlis excluded by!**/pnpm-lock.yaml
📒 Files selected for processing (18)
components/hubspot/actions/common/common-create-object.mjs(3 hunks)components/hubspot/actions/common/common-create.mjs(3 hunks)components/hubspot/actions/common/common-update-object.mjs(2 hunks)components/hubspot/actions/create-communication/create-communication.mjs(4 hunks)components/hubspot/actions/create-company/create-company.mjs(1 hunks)components/hubspot/actions/create-custom-object/create-custom-object.mjs(1 hunks)components/hubspot/actions/create-deal/create-deal.mjs(1 hunks)components/hubspot/actions/create-engagement/create-engagement.mjs(3 hunks)components/hubspot/actions/create-lead/create-lead.mjs(1 hunks)components/hubspot/actions/create-or-update-contact/create-or-update-contact.mjs(1 hunks)components/hubspot/actions/create-ticket/create-ticket.mjs(1 hunks)components/hubspot/actions/search-crm/search-crm.mjs(5 hunks)components/hubspot/actions/update-company/update-company.mjs(2 hunks)components/hubspot/actions/update-contact/update-contact.mjs(2 hunks)components/hubspot/actions/update-custom-object/update-custom-object.mjs(2 hunks)components/hubspot/actions/update-deal/update-deal.mjs(2 hunks)components/hubspot/actions/update-lead/update-lead.mjs(2 hunks)components/hubspot/package.json(1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (4)
- components/hubspot/actions/create-company/create-company.mjs
- components/hubspot/package.json
- components/hubspot/actions/create-deal/create-deal.mjs
- components/hubspot/actions/create-ticket/create-ticket.mjs
🔇 Additional comments (33)
components/hubspot/actions/update-contact/update-contact.mjs (2)
10-10: Version increment follows semantic versioning
The version bump from 0.0.11 to 0.0.12 appropriately reflects these non-breaking changes to the component's implementation.
Line range hint 19-28: Verify the spread operator ordering for props
The props structure looks correct with the spread operator usage, but let's verify that the property precedence is maintained correctly with this ordering:
...appProp.props(common auth props)objectId(component-specific prop)...common.props(common update object props)
✅ Verification successful
Props structure is consistent across HubSpot actions
The verification shows that the props structure follows a consistent pattern across all HubSpot action components:
...appProp.propsis always spread first- Component-specific props are defined in the middle
...common.propsis spread last when applicable
This ordering ensures proper property precedence, where component-specific props can override common props while still inheriting default behavior. The implementation in update-contact.mjs follows this established pattern correctly.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the consistency of props structure across similar HubSpot actions
# Check other HubSpot action files for consistent props structure
rg -l "appProp\.props" components/hubspot/actions/ | while read -r file; do
echo "=== $file ==="
# Show the props section with context
rg -A 10 "props:\s*{" "$file"
done
Length of output: 3073
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to verify the props structure
# First, let's check the specific file under review
echo "=== File under review ==="
rg -B 2 -A 10 "appProp\.props" components/hubspot/actions/update-contact/update-contact.mjs
# Then check other similar files for comparison
echo -e "\n=== Other similar files ==="
fd -e mjs . components/hubspot/actions/ -x rg -B 2 -A 10 "appProp\.props" {}
Length of output: 4052
components/hubspot/actions/update-lead/update-lead.mjs (3)
3-3: LGTM: Import change aligns with end-user auth support
The addition of common-app-prop.mjs import is consistent with the PR's objective to support end-user authentication, moving towards a more standardized property management approach.
19-22: Confirm authentication property integration
The replacement of direct hubspot property with appProp.props and the updated leadId propDefinition looks correct for supporting end-user authentication.
✅ Verification successful
Authentication property integration is consistent across HubSpot actions
The verification shows that:
- The
appProp.props.hubspotpattern is consistently implemented across all HubSpot update and create actions - The common app prop implementation correctly extends the HubSpot app with
reloadPropsenabled - The authentication property integration through
appProp.propsis properly standardized
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Verify the consistency of appProp implementation across HubSpot actions
# Check if all HubSpot actions are using the new appProp pattern
echo "Checking appProp usage across HubSpot actions:"
rg -g "components/hubspot/actions/*/*.mjs" "appProp.props.hubspot"
# Check the implementation of common-app-prop.mjs
echo -e "\nChecking common-app-prop.mjs implementation:"
cat components/hubspot/actions/common/common-app-prop.mjs
Length of output: 1547
10-10: Verify version bump impact
The version increment from 0.0.2 to 0.0.3 suggests a minor update. Since this involves authentication changes, we should verify if this warrants a more significant version bump.
✅ Verification successful
Based on the shell script results, I can now provide a conclusive response about the version bump concern:
Version bump is appropriate for this change
The version increment from 0.0.2 to 0.0.3 for the update-lead action is consistent with semantic versioning practices in this codebase. Looking at other HubSpot actions:
- Most actions are at versions like 0.0.11, 0.0.12, 0.0.13
- Similar lead-related components (create-lead) are also at 0.0.3
- The change involves authentication modifications which are typically handled as patch versions in this codebase
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check version numbers across other HubSpot action components
# to ensure consistent versioning strategy
echo "Checking versions in other HubSpot action components:"
rg -g "components/hubspot/actions/*/*.mjs" '"version":' -A 1
Length of output: 179
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to find version information
# First, let's check the specific file content
echo "Checking the specific file content:"
cat components/hubspot/actions/update-lead/update-lead.mjs
echo -e "\nChecking for version patterns in all HubSpot action files:"
fd . components/hubspot/actions -e mjs -x grep -l "version" {} \; -x cat {}
Length of output: 38922
components/hubspot/actions/create-custom-object/create-custom-object.mjs (3)
1-2: LGTM: Clean separation of authentication properties
The addition of appProp import helps modularize authentication-related properties, which aligns with the PR's objective of supporting end user authentication.
9-9: LGTM: Appropriate version increment
The patch version increment (0.0.2 → 0.0.3) correctly reflects the backward-compatible addition of end user authentication support.
Line range hint 12-19: Verify appProp structure and props precedence
The props restructuring looks good and properly integrates end user authentication. However, let's verify the complete structure of appProp to ensure all necessary authentication properties are included.
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about the props structure and usage pattern.
Let me check one more thing to verify the common props structure.
Based on the analysis of all the gathered information, I can now provide the final response:
Props restructuring is correctly implemented and safe
The changes to the props structure in create-custom-object.mjs are verified to be correct and follow the established pattern across other Hubspot actions:
appProp.propsspread correctly includes the authenticated hubspot instance and related auth propscustomObjectTypeprop properly references the hubspot instance fromappProp.props- The order of spreads is consistent with other actions (appProp -> specific props -> common props)
- The base props structure from
common-create-object.mjsis maintained
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the structure of appProp and its usage across other Hubspot actions
# Check the appProp definition
echo "Checking appProp definition:"
cat components/hubspot/actions/common/common-app-prop.mjs
# Check for consistent usage across other actions
echo -e "\nChecking usage pattern across other actions:"
rg -l "appProp" components/hubspot/actions/
Length of output: 980
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the common props structure and its usage
echo "Checking common props structure:"
cat components/hubspot/actions/common/common.mjs
# Check how appProp and common props are used in other create actions
echo -e "\nChecking create-lead action:"
cat components/hubspot/actions/create-lead/create-lead.mjs
echo -e "\nChecking create-communication action:"
cat components/hubspot/actions/create-communication/create-communication.mjs
# Check the base hubspot app definition
echo -e "\nChecking base hubspot app:"
cat components/hubspot/hubspot.app.mjs
Length of output: 32858
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the common-create-object.mjs file
echo "Checking common-create-object.mjs:"
cat components/hubspot/actions/common/common-create-object.mjs
Length of output: 3194
components/hubspot/actions/update-company/update-company.mjs (3)
3-3: LGTM: Import change aligns with end-user auth support
The addition of appProp import from common-app-prop.mjs is consistent with the PR's objective of supporting end-user authentication.
19-22: LGTM: Props restructuring enhances authentication flexibility
The changes effectively:
- Incorporate common auth properties via
...appProp.props - Update the
objectIdprop to reference the standardized HubSpot client
✅ Verification successful
Props restructuring is consistently applied across HubSpot actions
The verification confirms that appProp.props.hubspot is consistently used across multiple HubSpot action components for prop definitions, including:
- update-lead
- update-deal
- update-custom-object
- update-contact
- update-company
- create-lead
- create-custom-object
- create-communication
The restructuring pattern matches the standardized approach used throughout the codebase.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Verify consistent usage of appProp.props.hubspot across HubSpot actions
echo "Checking appProp.props.hubspot usage in other HubSpot actions..."
rg -g "components/hubspot/actions/*/*.mjs" "appProp\.props\.hubspot" -B 2 -A 2
Length of output: 5086
10-10: Verify semantic versioning compliance
The version bump from 0.0.10 to 0.0.11 suggests a patch change. Given that we're adding end-user auth support, should this be a minor version bump instead (0.1.0)?
components/hubspot/actions/update-custom-object/update-custom-object.mjs (3)
9-9: LGTM: Version bump is appropriate
The version increment from 0.0.2 to 0.0.3 appropriately reflects the addition of end-user auth support while maintaining backward compatibility.
2-2: Verify the common-app-prop implementation for end-user auth support
The addition of appProp import suggests this component is being updated to support end-user authentication. Let's verify the implementation of the common properties.
✅ Verification successful
Import of appProp is correctly implemented for end-user auth support
The verification confirms that:
- The
common-app-prop.mjscorrectly extends the HubSpot app withreloadProps: truefor dynamic auth properties - The HubSpot app implementation includes OAuth authentication via
this.$auth.oauth_access_token - The import is consistently used across all update actions in the HubSpot component
- The pattern aligns with other actions like
update-companywhich follows the same structure
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the common-app-prop.mjs implementation and its usage across HubSpot actions
# Check the common-app-prop implementation
echo "Checking common-app-prop.mjs implementation:"
cat components/hubspot/actions/common/common-app-prop.mjs
# Check for consistent usage across other HubSpot actions
echo -e "\nChecking usage across other HubSpot actions:"
rg -l "common-app-prop.mjs" components/hubspot/actions/
Length of output: 1024
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's verify if the hubspot app implementation supports end-user auth
echo "Checking hubspot app implementation:"
cat components/hubspot/hubspot.app.mjs
# Check if other update actions have similar structure
echo -e "\nChecking structure of another update action for comparison:"
cat components/hubspot/actions/update-company/update-company.mjs
Length of output: 28745
Line range hint 18-34: Verify property resolution order and potential conflicts
The props restructuring looks good, following a clear pattern:
- Base properties from appProp
- Component-specific properties
- Common update object properties
However, let's verify there are no property conflicts or unintended overrides in this inheritance chain.
✅ Verification successful
Property resolution order is correct and no conflicts found
The property resolution follows the intended pattern and is conflict-free:
appProp.propsprovides the basehubspotproperty- Component-specific properties (
customObjectType,objectId) are defined with correct dependencies common.propsspreads last, addingpropertyGroupsandobjectPropertieswithout overriding the previous properties
The inheritance chain is properly structured with no duplicate property definitions or unintended overrides. Each property serves a distinct purpose:
hubspot: Authentication and base app functionalitycustomObjectType: Custom object type selectionobjectId: Object identification (depends on customObjectType)propertyGroupsandobjectProperties: Common update functionality
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for potential property naming conflicts
# Check property definitions in all related files
echo "Checking property definitions in common files:"
ast-grep --pattern 'props: {
$$$
}' components/hubspot/actions/common/common-app-prop.mjs components/hubspot/actions/common/common-update-object.mjs
# Check for any duplicate property definitions
echo -e "\nChecking for properties defined in multiple places:"
rg -A 5 'propDefinition:' components/hubspot/actions/common/
Length of output: 435
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to check property definitions
# First, let's check the content of common files
echo "Content of common-app-prop.mjs:"
cat components/hubspot/actions/common/common-app-prop.mjs
echo -e "\nContent of common-update-object.mjs:"
cat components/hubspot/actions/common/common-update-object.mjs
# Check the update-custom-object component
echo -e "\nContent of update-custom-object.mjs:"
cat components/hubspot/actions/update-custom-object/update-custom-object.mjs
Length of output: 3598
components/hubspot/actions/update-deal/update-deal.mjs (4)
3-3: LGTM: Good modularization of auth properties
The addition of appProp import aligns with centralizing authentication-related properties, which supports the PR's objective of enabling end-user authentication.
19-22: LGTM: Clean property restructuring
The property restructuring maintains functionality while properly centralizing authentication-related properties. The use of spread operator and correct referencing of appProp.props.hubspot follows good practices.
Line range hint 1-31: Verify complete end-user auth implementation
Since this PR aims to support end-user authentication, let's verify the complete implementation.
10-10: Verify version bump follows project guidelines
The version increment to "0.0.2" seems appropriate for the auth-related changes. Let's verify this follows the project's versioning pattern.
✅ Verification successful
Version increment follows component patterns
Based on the search results, the version increment from 0.0.1 to 0.0.2 for the "Update Deal" component is consistent with the versioning pattern used across other HubSpot components. Other similar components show incremental version numbers like:
- Update Contact: 0.0.12
- Update Lead: 0.0.3
- Update Company: 0.0.11
- Update Custom Object: 0.0.3
The minor version bump is appropriate for auth-related changes and follows the established pattern in the codebase.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check versioning pattern in other HubSpot components
# Expected: Find version numbers in other HubSpot action components for comparison
echo "Checking versioning pattern in HubSpot components..."
rg '"version":' components/hubspot/actions/ -A 1 -B 1
Length of output: 170
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to find version patterns
# 1. Search for "version" string in component props
echo "Searching for version patterns in HubSpot components..."
rg "version[\"']?: [\"'][\d\.]+" components/hubspot/actions/ --type js
# 2. Also check package.json files if they exist
echo -e "\nChecking package.json files in HubSpot components..."
fd package.json components/hubspot/actions/ --exec cat {}
# 3. Look for version in component definitions
echo -e "\nChecking component definitions..."
ast-grep --pattern 'prop: {
$$$
version: $_
$$$
}'
Length of output: 522
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try one more approach to find version patterns
# 1. Search for version property in .mjs files
echo "Searching for version in .mjs files..."
rg "version" components/hubspot/actions/ --type mjs -C 2
# 2. Look for any files with similar structure
echo -e "\nSearching for similar component structure files..."
fd . components/hubspot/actions/ -e mjs -x head -n 20 {}
Length of output: 17443
components/hubspot/actions/create-lead/create-lead.mjs (3)
5-5: LGTM: Good centralization of common properties
The addition of appProp import aligns with the standardization of property management across HubSpot actions.
Line range hint 33-52: Verify end user authentication flow
The object creation logic remains unchanged, but we should verify that the end user authentication is properly handled through the common properties.
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about the authentication implementation.
Based on the analysis of the code, I can now provide the final response:
Authentication is properly implemented through OAuth token
The authentication is correctly handled through the HubSpot app's common implementation:
- OAuth access token is securely managed via
this.$auth.oauth_access_token - Authentication headers are properly set in the
_getHeaders()method - All API requests use these headers through the
makeRequestmethod - The create-lead action inherits this authentication through the common app properties
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify end user authentication implementation
# Expected: Proper auth handling in common properties and usage in create method
echo "Checking auth implementation..."
# Check common app properties implementation
cat components/hubspot/actions/common/common-app-prop.mjs
# Check auth-related patterns in create object implementation
ast-grep --pattern 'createObject($$$) {
$$$
}'
Length of output: 330
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the main hubspot app implementation for auth handling
cat components/hubspot/hubspot.app.mjs
# Look for auth-related patterns in the codebase
rg -l "auth" --type js components/hubspot/
# Check for OAuth or authentication configurations
rg -l "oauth" --type js components/hubspot/
Length of output: 27789
15-18: Verify backward compatibility of property changes
The restructuring of props looks good, but let's verify that existing implementations aren't affected by the property source changes.
✅ Verification successful
Based on the search results, I can see that the property restructuring in create-lead.mjs follows a consistent pattern used across other actions in the codebase. The changes maintain the same property structure where hubspot is accessed through appProp.props, which is the standard way properties are handled in other components like search-crm, create-communication, etc.
Let me verify one more aspect to ensure complete backwards compatibility:
Let me try one more verification to check the property structure:
Property changes maintain backward compatibility
The restructuring of props is safe and maintains backward compatibility because:
- The
hubspotproperty is correctly accessed throughappProp.props.hubspotwhich is the standard pattern used across the codebase - The spread operator
...appProp.propspreserves all common properties - The property definition structure follows the same pattern used in other components
- The actual usage of the
hubspotproperty in thecreateObjectmethod remains unchanged
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for potential breaking changes in property usage
# Expected: No direct references to the old property structure
echo "Checking for potential breaking changes in property usage..."
rg -A 5 'hubspot\.' components/hubspot/actions/
Length of output: 43827
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the history of create-lead.mjs to see the previous property structure
ast-grep --pattern 'props: {
$$$
hubspot,
$$$
}' components/hubspot/actions/create-lead/create-lead.mjs
Length of output: 111
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the entire create-lead.mjs file to understand the property structure
cat components/hubspot/actions/create-lead/create-lead.mjs
Length of output: 1475
components/hubspot/actions/create-or-update-contact/create-or-update-contact.mjs (3)
9-9: LGTM! Version bump is appropriate.
The patch version increment aligns with the addition of the new updateIfExists property.
Line range hint 1-24: Verify PR scope and implementation completeness
The changes in this file focus on error handling improvements rather than end user authentication support mentioned in the PR description.
Let's verify if end user auth related changes are present in other files:
Line range hint 13-17: Clarify property behavior and add validation
While the new property adds useful functionality for error handling, there are a few concerns:
- The description could be more specific about when and how updates occur
- Consider adding a default value for consistent behavior
- This change seems unrelated to the PR's stated objective of supporting end user auth
Let's check how this integrates with the common create object implementation:
Consider applying these improvements:
updateIfExists: {
label: "Update If Exists",
- description: "When selected, if Hubspot returns an error upon creation the resource should be updated.",
+ description: "When enabled and a contact already exists (based on email), the existing contact will be updated instead of returning an error.",
type: "boolean",
+ default: false,
},✅ Verification successful
Property description accurately reflects implementation, but needs default value
The implementation shows that updateIfExists is correctly used to handle CONFLICT and OBJECT_ALREADY_EXISTS errors by attempting an update operation. The current description could be more precise, but it's not misleading. The main improvement needed is adding a default value.
updateIfExists: {
label: "Update If Exists",
description: "When selected, if Hubspot returns an error upon creation the resource should be updated.",
type: "boolean",
+ default: false,
},- The property is well integrated with the common create object implementation at
components/hubspot/actions/common/common-create-object.mjs - The error handling logic properly checks for specific error categories before attempting updates
- While this change appears unrelated to end user auth, it's a valid enhancement to the contact creation functionality
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check how the updateIfExists property is used in the common module
ast-grep --pattern 'updateIfExists'
Length of output: 141
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the implementation context around updateIfExists usage
ast-grep --pattern $'if (updateIfExists && err?.message) {
$$$
}'
Length of output: 1772
components/hubspot/actions/search-crm/search-crm.mjs (2)
18-18: Version updated to 0.0.10
The version bump reflects the new changes and improvements made in this action.
164-166: Addition of getObjectType() method enhances modularity
Introducing the getObjectType() method improves code reuse and aligns with the patterns used in other components.
components/hubspot/actions/common/common-create-object.mjs (1)
12-12: Property propertyGroups should remain visible if required
Setting propertyGroups to hidden: true may impact the user experience if they need to select property groups. Ensure this change aligns with the intended functionality.
Is there an alternative approach that maintains necessary functionality without hiding this property?
components/hubspot/actions/create-communication/create-communication.mjs (2)
2-2: Update import path to ensure module resolution
The import path for appProp has been changed. Verify that the new path '../common/common-app-prop.mjs' correctly resolves the module.
Ensure that common-app-prop.mjs is located at the updated path and accessible.
11-11: Version updated to 0.0.4
The version increment reflects the updates made to this action.
components/hubspot/actions/create-engagement/create-engagement.mjs (2)
12-12: LGTM: Version bump is appropriate.
Version increment reflects the addition of end user auth support feature.
90-91: LGTM: Clean property extraction.
The destructuring properly separates objectProperties while collecting remaining properties.
components/hubspot/actions/common/common-create.mjs (2)
4-4: LGTM: Clean modular import.
Good separation of concerns by importing common app properties from a dedicated module.
46-46: LGTM: Clean props composition.
Effectively incorporates common app properties while maintaining extensibility.
components/hubspot/actions/create-communication/create-communication.mjs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
components/hubspot/actions/create-communication/create-communication.mjs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
components/hubspot/actions/common/common-create.mjs (1)
115-115: Add parameter validation for existingProps.While the property manipulation logic is sound, consider adding validation to ensure
existingPropsis an object and has the expected structure.async additionalProps(existingProps) { + if (!existingProps || typeof existingProps !== 'object') { + throw new Error('existingProps must be an object'); + } const objectType = this.getObjectType();Also applies to: 140-146
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
components/hubspot/actions/common/common-create.mjs(3 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
components/hubspot/actions/common/common-create.mjs (2)
4-4: LGTM! Good refactoring to use shared props.
The change to import and spread appProp.props improves code reuse and maintainability.
Also applies to: 46-46
136-138: Consider adding property value validation.
While the code filters properties appropriately, consider adding validation for property values before they're used in the API calls to prevent potential injection or data integrity issues.
|
/approve |
Resolves #14913
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
objectPropertiesfor structured input in various actions, enhancing object and engagement creation.updateIfExistsproperty to allow updates during contact creation errors.Version Updates
Bug Fixes
additionalPropsandcreationPropsmethods for better robustness.Refactor
appPropfor property management across multiple actions.