Restore Metadata

[josephjclark]

Description

This PR ports the legacy metadata service into the new collaborative editor

(no issue but it came out of #4386 )

Background

Metadata in this context refers to database/entity metadata pulled from the target backend service. So if you're editing a Salesforce step, the metadata is all the sObjects in the Salesforce instance the credential points to. If you're editing DHIS2, it's all the entities and attributes and stuff defined in the DHIS2 instance your credential points to.

Metadata was a bit of an experiment we did back in the day that never quite took off. We only support metadata for dhis2 and salesforce.

Metadata shows up in two places:

• The Metadata tab provides a nice list of all the metadata entities available. Users might want to refer to these things while writing job code
• In the code editor, we provide code assist based on metadata. We do this very very selectively and it's very very cool. See validation steps for more details.

Validation steps

1. Create a DHIS2 step
2. Create a credential with url https://play.im.dhis2.org/stable-2-42-3-1 user admin and password district
3. The Metadata tab should be populated with entities from the DHIS2 backend
4. Start typing create() (you should get code assist but maybe try ctrl + space)
5. You should get code assist for the first argument (a string ,try tracked-entity)
6. You should get code assist for the second argument. Start typing to the code below - you should get magic code assist on the attribute value)

create('tracked-entities', {
  attributes: [{
    attribute: 
  }]
})

AI Usage

Please disclose whether you've used AI anywhere in this PR (it's cool, we just
want to know!):

• I have used Claude Code
• I have used another model
• I have not used AI

You can read more details in our
Responsible AI Policy

[josephjclark]

I'll need to rebase this on make-intellisense-great-again before review

[doc-han]

I'll need to rebase this on make-intellisense-great-again before review

should I wait on the review till this is done?

[josephjclark]

@doc-han yes please - unless you wanted to take over the PR 😇 I doubt I'll get to it this week

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 87.50000% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 89.46%. Comparing base (3759331) to head (f6cb2c8).
⚠️ Report is 22 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
lib/lightning_web/channels/workflow_channel.ex	87.50%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #4388      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   89.41%   89.46%   +0.04%     
==========================================
  Files         425      425              
  Lines       20221    20229       +8     
==========================================
+ Hits        18081    18097      +16     
+ Misses       2140     2132       -8     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[josephjclark]

This is ready for another review @doc-han @elias-ba @theroinaochieng

Just failing on codecov

[josephjclark]

@midigofrank do you have time for a review on this tomorrow?

[midigofrank]

Nicely done 🙌

[github-actions]

Security Review

⚠️ Automated security review did not complete.

Claude hit the max-turns limit or encountered an error before posting findings.
A manual review of S0 (project-scoped data access), S1 (authorization policies),
and S2 (audit trail coverage) is recommended for this PR.

See the workflow run for details.