module path

[Chhinna]

CodeAnt-AI Description

Add module_path input to resolve files for nested modules in monorepos

What Changed

• The GitHub Action now accepts a new input named module_path so you can specify a nested module directory (for example, services/backend) in monorepo repositories.
• When provided, the action forwards the module path during the upload step so coverage files are resolved relative to that directory; if not provided, the existing module behavior is used.
• The README and action metadata were updated to show the module_path example, describe its purpose, and include it in the inputs table.

Impact

✅ Correct coverage resolution for nested modules
✅ Fewer missing or mis-attributed coverage uploads in monorepos
✅ Clearer configuration for monorepo coverage uploads

💡 Usage Guide

Checking Your Pull Request

Every time you make a pull request, our system automatically looks through it. We check for security issues, mistakes in how you're setting up your infrastructure, and common code problems. We do this to make sure your changes are solid and won't cause any trouble later.

Talking to CodeAnt AI

Got a question or need a hand with something in your pull request? You can easily get in touch with CodeAnt AI right here. Just type the following in a comment on your pull request, and replace "Your question here" with whatever you want to ask:

@codeant-ai ask: Your question here

This lets you have a chat with CodeAnt AI about your pull request, making it easier to understand and improve your code.

Example

@codeant-ai ask: Can you suggest a safer alternative to storing this secret?

Preserve Org Learnings with CodeAnt

You can record team preferences so CodeAnt AI applies them in future reviews. Reply directly to the specific CodeAnt AI suggestion (in the same thread) and replace "Your feedback here" with your input:

@codeant-ai: Your feedback here

This helps CodeAnt AI learn and adapt to your team's coding style and standards.

Example

@codeant-ai: Do not flag unused imports.

Retrigger review

Ask CodeAnt AI to review the PR again, by typing:

@codeant-ai: review

Check Your Repository Health

To analyze the health of your code repository, visit our dashboard at https://app.codeant.ai. This tool helps you identify potential issues and areas for improvement in your codebase, ensuring your repository maintains high standards of code health.

[codeant-ai]

CodeAnt AI is reviewing your PR.

[codeant-ai]

Suggestion: Fix the Inputs table inconsistency by clarifying that module_path defaults to the value of module when not provided and reflect that in the Default column. [possible issue]

Severity Level: Minor ⚠️

Suggested change

	| `module_path` | Module path for resolving files in monorepo (e.g., services/backend, defaults to module if not provided) | No | `''` |
	| `module_path` | Module path for resolving files in monorepo (e.g., services/backend; defaults to the value of `module` if not provided) | No | `module` |

Why it matters? ⭐

The Inputs table currently states that module_path defaults to the module when not provided, yet the Default column shows an empty string ('').
That is a documentation inconsistency that can mislead users; updating the table to reflect the intended fallback (e.g., module) is a clear, correct fix.

Prompt for AI Agent 🤖

<code>This is a comment left during a code review.

**Path:** README.md
**Line:** 73:73
**Comment:**
	*Possible Issue: Fix the Inputs table inconsistency by clarifying that `module_path` defaults to the value of `module` when not provided and reflect that in the Default column.

Validate the correctness of the flagged issue. If correct, How can I resolve this? If you propose a fix, implement it and please make it concise.

[codeant-ai]

Suggestion: Use shell parameter expansion when passing MODULE_PATH to the script so it falls back to MODULE when module_path input is empty. [possible issue]

Severity Level: Minor ⚠️

Suggested change

	-P "$MODULE_PATH"
	-P "${MODULE_PATH:-$MODULE}"

Why it matters? ⭐

The current invocation will pass an empty MODULE_PATH if the input is unset, which contradicts the action description that implies a fallback. Using shell parameter expansion ensures the runtime behavior matches the docs and avoids passing an empty path to upload_coverage.sh. This is a practical, minimal change that fixes a likely bug in common usage.

Prompt for AI Agent 🤖

<code>This is a comment left during a code review.

**Path:** action.yml
**Line:** 83:83
**Comment:**
	*Possible Issue: Use shell parameter expansion when passing `MODULE_PATH` to the script so it falls back to `MODULE` when `module_path` input is empty.

Validate the correctness of the flagged issue. If correct, How can I resolve this? If you propose a fix, implement it and please make it concise.

[codeant-ai]

Pull Request Feedback 🔍

🔒 No security issues identified

⚡ Recommended areas for review Missing default use in invocation The run arguments pass both -m "$MODULE" and -P "$MODULE_PATH" as-is. If MODULE_PATH is empty, the script will receive an empty -P argument rather than using MODULE as the intended default per the input description. This can lead to incorrect behavior unless the script itself handles defaulting. Action metadata mismatch The README documents a new module_path input, but the repository must also include corresponding changes in the action metadata (e.g., action.yml) and in the code that reads/forwards inputs. Verify the input is declared in the action metadata, has the correct default, and is being forwarded to the upload logic so behavior matches the README.

[codeant-ai]

Suggestion: Update the module_path input description to explicitly document the enforced fallback to module and the expected allowed format (relative path, no '..', no leading '/'). [possible issue]

[codeant-ai]

CodeAnt AI finished reviewing your PR.