Feature/implement risk rule ( WIP ) BAL-2445 #2528
Conversation
|
WalkthroughThe updates significantly enhance the risk management capabilities of the workflow service by expanding the data model with new fields, enums, and models for risk and rule processing. New services, repositories, and controllers provide comprehensive management functionality, while validation schemas ensure structured handling of operations. This structured approach promotes a robust, organized framework for managing compliance and risk assessment within the application. Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant Client
participant RiskRulePolicyController
participant RiskRulePolicyService
participant RiskRulePolicyRepository
participant Database
Client->>+RiskRulePolicyController: Create Policy Request
RiskRulePolicyController->>+RiskRulePolicyService: Call createRiskRulePolicy
RiskRulePolicyService->>+RiskRulePolicyRepository: Persist new policy
RiskRulePolicyRepository->>+Database: Insert policy record
Database-->>-RiskRulePolicyRepository: Policy record ID
RiskRulePolicyRepository-->>-RiskRulePolicyService: Policy record ID
RiskRulePolicyService-->>-RiskRulePolicyController: Policy record ID
RiskRulePolicyController-->>-Client: Response with Policy ID
Client->>+RiskRulePolicyController: Add Risk Rule to Policy Request
RiskRulePolicyController->>+RiskRulePolicyService: Call addRiskRuleToPolicy
RiskRulePolicyService->>+RiskRulePolicyRepository: Associate risk rule
RiskRulePolicyRepository->>+Database: Update policy with risk rule
Database-->>-RiskRulePolicyRepository: Update confirmation
RiskRulePolicyRepository-->>-RiskRulePolicyService: Association confirmation
RiskRulePolicyService-->>-RiskRulePolicyController: Association confirmation
RiskRulePolicyController-->>-Client: Response with association confirmation
Poem
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 as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add 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, codebase verification and nitpick comments (4)
services/workflows-service/src/helpers/type-box/type-string-enum.ts (1)
1-8: Utility function for dynamic string enums is well-implemented.The
TypeStringEnumfunction is a useful utility for creating dynamic string enums with TypeBox. It is flexible and correctly uses generics.Consider documenting the use of
Type.Unsafe.The use of
Type.Unsafemight not be immediately clear to all developers. Consider adding detailed comments explaining why it is used here and its implications.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/schemas/create-rule-policy.schema.ts (1)
1-3: Check import paths and module usage.The import paths use both relative and absolute notations. Ensure consistency in import styles across the project for better maintainability.
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-set/risk-rule-set.repository.ts (2)
18-22: Consider adding error handling for thefindManymethod.Handling cases where no records are found could improve the robustness of the application, perhaps returning an empty array or a custom message.
52-60: Consider adding transactional integrity to thedeleteByIdmethod.Implementing transactional checks could prevent partial deletions and ensure data consistency, especially in complex operations involving multiple tables or steps.
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (21)
- packages/common/src/rule-engine/types.ts (1 hunks)
- packages/workflow-core/src/lib/plugins/common-plugin/types.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/plugins/verify-repository-project-scoped/verify-repository-project-scoped.rule.js (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/prisma/data-migrations (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/prisma/migrations/20240716155934_create_rule_policy/migration.sql (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/prisma/schema.prisma (5 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/app.module.ts (2 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/helpers/type-box/type-string-enum.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.module.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.repository.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.service.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-set/risk-rule-set.module.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-set/risk-rule-set.repository.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-set/risk-rule-set.service.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.module.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.repository.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.service.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/schemas/create-risk-rule.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/schemas/create-rule-policy.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/schemas/create-rule-set.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/schemas/create-rule.schema.ts (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (2)
- services/workflows-service/prisma/data-migrations
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.module.ts
Additional comments not posted (19)
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/schemas/create-rule-policy.schema.ts (1)
5-10: Review the schema definition for completeness and clarity.The schema
CreateRuleSetSchemais well-defined with descriptions provided for each field. However, ensure that the field names and descriptions accurately reflect their purpose and usage within the system.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.module.ts (1)
1-10: Validate module configuration and dependencies.The module configuration is correct and follows NestJS best practices. The use of
AppLoggerModuleandPrismaModulesuggests a well-structured approach to logging and database management. However, ensure that these modules are configured correctly elsewhere in the project to avoid integration issues.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/schemas/create-rule.schema.ts (1)
1-14: Assess schema definition for accuracy and extensibility.
CreateRuleSchemaincludes diverse fields with clear descriptions. The use of enums foroperationandengineenhances the schema's robustness. Verify that the enum values fromOPERATIONand the engines listed are consistent with the system's requirements and documentation.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/schemas/create-rule-set.schema.ts (1)
1-15: Evaluate schema definition for rule sets.The
CreateRuleSetSchemais structured to support complex rule sets with an operator and multiple rules. Ensure that theOPERATORenum values are correctly implemented and that the integration ofCreateRuleSchemawithin this schema does not introduce any inconsistencies.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-set/risk-rule-set.module.ts (1)
1-12: Module Configuration Looks Good!The module is correctly structured with necessary imports and providers. It's important to ensure that this new module integrates well with the rest of the application.
Verification successful
Module Configuration Looks Good!
The
RiskRuleSetModuleis correctly integrated within the application as evidenced by its imports and usage in other modules.
RiskRuleSetModuleis declared and exported.- It is imported in other modules and used in their
importsarray.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the RiskRuleSetModule is correctly integrated within the application. # Test: Search for the module usage in the application. Expect: Correct imports and usage in other modules. rg --type typescript -A 5 $'RiskRuleSetModule'Length of output: 80
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the RiskRuleSetModule is correctly integrated within the application. # Find all TypeScript files and search for the usage of RiskRuleSetModule within them. fd -e ts -x rg 'RiskRuleSetModule' {}Length of output: 329
packages/common/src/rule-engine/types.ts (1)
35-45: New Type Definitions for Rule OptionsThe new types
TNotionRulesOptionsandTDatabaseRulesOptionsare well-defined and appropriately structured. Ensure these types are used correctly in the context of rule fetching and processing.Verification successful
New Type Definitions for Rule Options
The new types
TNotionRulesOptionsandTDatabaseRulesOptionsare well-defined and appropriately structured. They are correctly used through theTFindAllRulesOptionstype in the context of rule fetching and processing.
packages/workflow-core/src/lib/plugins/common-plugin/types.tsservices/workflows-service/src/workflow/workflow.service.tsScripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of the new rule types in the application. # Test: Search for the usage of `TNotionRulesOptions` and `TDatabaseRulesOptions`. Expect: Correct usage in rule fetching and processing. rg --type typescript -A 5 $'TNotionRulesOptions|TDatabaseRulesOptions'Length of output: 106
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of the new rule types in the application. # Test: Search for the usage of `TNotionRulesOptions` and `TDatabaseRulesOptions`. Expect: Correct usage in rule fetching and processing. rg -A 5 'TNotionRulesOptions|TDatabaseRulesOptions'Length of output: 750
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of the new rule types in the application. # Test: Search for the usage of `TNotionRulesOptions` and `TDatabaseRulesOptions` in the codebase. rg 'TNotionRulesOptions|TDatabaseRulesOptions'Length of output: 325
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of the new rule types in the application. # Test: Search for the usage of `TFindAllRulesOptions` in the codebase. rg 'TFindAllRulesOptions'Length of output: 1059
services/workflows-service/plugins/verify-repository-project-scoped/verify-repository-project-scoped.rule.js (1)
13-13: Regex Pattern Adjustment in Repository Verification RuleThe adjustment to the regex pattern to exclude certain repository files is appropriate. Verify that this change does not unintentionally exclude other necessary checks.
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/schemas/create-risk-rule.schema.ts (1)
1-38: Comprehensive Schema Definition for Risk RulesThe schema for creating risk rules is well-defined with appropriate constraints and descriptions. Ensure that this schema is correctly integrated into API endpoints and that validation functions as expected.
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.repository.ts (2)
14-21: Method implementation looks correct.The
createRiskRulePolicymethod correctly uses the Prisma client to create a new risk rule policy, passing the necessary arguments.
47-51: Method implementation looks correct.The
findRiskRulePolicyByProjectIdmethod correctly fetches a risk rule policy based on the project ID.services/workflows-service/prisma/migrations/20240716155934_create_rule_policy/migration.sql (1)
2-2: Comprehensive review of SQL migration script.This SQL migration script is well-structured and appears to correctly implement the database schema changes required for the new risk rule feature. Here are some specific observations and suggestions:
Enums and Tables Creation:
- The creation of enums
IndicatorRiskLevelandRuleEngineis aligned with the PR objectives to handle risk levels and rule engines.- Tables for
WorkflowDefinitionRiskRulePolicy,RiskRulesPolicy,RiskRuleSet, andRuleare appropriately defined with primary keys and necessary fields.Indexes:
- The creation of unique and non-unique indexes is a good practice for optimizing database queries. However, ensure that the fields indexed are those that will commonly be used in query predicates.
Foreign Keys:
- The foreign key constraints are set to
ON DELETE RESTRICTandON UPDATE CASCADE, which are sensible defaults to maintain data integrity. Ensure that this behavior is expected and desired in the application logic.General Best Practices:
- Consider adding comments to each section of the SQL script for better readability and maintainability.
- Ensure that all new fields and tables are covered by appropriate unit tests to validate their behavior under various conditions.
Overall, the SQL migration script meets the requirements and follows good practices. No immediate changes are necessary unless specific issues are identified in the context of the entire application.
Also applies to: 5-5, 8-16, 19-26, 29-43, 46-58, 61-71, 73-79, 81-94
services/workflows-service/src/app.module.ts (1)
50-52: Review of module imports and integration.The addition of
RiskRulePolicyModule,RiskRuleSetModule, andRuleModuleto the application's main module is consistent with the PR's objectives to enhance the risk management capabilities. Here are a few considerations:
Module Integration:
- Ensure that these modules do not introduce circular dependencies with other parts of the application.
- Verify that the services provided by these modules are correctly injected where needed and that they interact seamlessly with existing modules.
Configuration and Initialization:
- Check if any environment-specific configurations are required for these modules and if they are handled appropriately.
- Ensure that any initialization code within these modules does not adversely affect the startup time of the application.
Error Handling:
- Confirm that error handling within these modules is robust, especially in interactions with external services or databases.
The integration of new modules appears correct and well-handled. It is recommended to perform integration testing to ensure that these modules function as expected within the larger application context.
Also applies to: 130-133
services/workflows-service/prisma/schema.prisma (1)
191-197: Review of Prisma schema changes.The modifications and additions to the Prisma schema are extensive and align with the objectives to enhance risk management capabilities. Here are specific observations and recommendations:
New Models and Enums:
- The new enums
IndicatorRiskLevelandRuleEngineare correctly defined and used in the models.- The new models
WorkflowDefinitionRiskRulePolicy,RiskRulesPolicy,RiskRuleSet, andRuleare well-structured with appropriate fields and relationships.Model Relationships:
- Ensure that the relationships (e.g.,
@relationattributes) are correctly configured to enforce integrity and facilitate efficient queries.- Verify that optional and mandatory fields are correctly marked, reflecting the business logic and data requirements.
Indexes and Unique Constraints:
- The use of indexes and unique constraints is appropriate. However, review the chosen fields to ensure they are the most relevant for query optimization.
Migration and Compatibility:
- Ensure that these schema changes are compatible with existing data and that a migration path is clearly defined for production environments.
The Prisma schema changes are well-implemented and should support the new functionalities as expected. It is advisable to conduct thorough testing, especially focusing on database interactions and performance under load.
Also applies to: 374-374, 811-815, 866-869, 895-962
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-set/risk-rule-set.repository.ts (2)
9-15: Verify the integrity of input arguments in thecreatemethod.Ensure that
createArgsdoes not already include ariskRulePolicyIdwhich could potentially overwrite the intended value or cause unexpected behavior.
36-49: Verify the uniqueness and correct usage of the compound key in theupdateByIdmethod.Ensure that the
id_riskRulePolicyIdcompound key is uniquely defined in the database schema and correctly used here to prevent any potential issues with record identification.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-set/risk-rule-set.service.ts (3)
45-49: Good error handling inupdatemethod.The method correctly handles the case where an updated risk rule set is not found by throwing a
NotFoundException.
52-58: Good error handling indeletemethod.The method correctly handles the case where the risk rule set is not found during the delete operation by throwing a
NotFoundException.
33-50: Address the TODO and verify complete implementation ofupdatemethod.The TODO comment suggests that the update functionality might be incomplete. Ensure that this is addressed before finalizing the PR.
Verification successful
Address the TODO comment in the
updatemethod.The
updateByIdmethod inrisk-rule-set.repository.tsis fully implemented and functional. Ensure that the TODO comment in theupdatemethod ofrisk-rule-set.service.tsis addressed or removed to reflect the complete implementation.
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-set/risk-rule-set.service.ts: Line 37Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the update functionality is complete and integrated properly. # Test: Search for the TODO comment and related implementation details. rg --type typescript -A 5 $'TODO update to risk to update module'Length of output: 101
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the update functionality is complete and integrated properly. # Test: Search for the TODO comment and related implementation details. rg --type ts -A 5 $'TODO update to risk to update module'Length of output: 725
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the implementation of the updateById method in riskRuleSetRepository. # Test: Search for the updateById method in the repository. rg --type ts 'updateById'Length of output: 8074
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Extract the implementation details of the updateById method in risk-rule-set.repository.ts. # Test: Extract the implementation of the updateById method in risk-rule-set.repository.ts. rg --type ts -A 20 'async updateById' services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-set/risk-rule-set.repository.tsLength of output: 623
packages/workflow-core/src/lib/plugins/common-plugin/types.ts (1)
52-52: Verify the impact of changingrulesSourceand document the change.The change from a specific object structure to
TFindAllRulesOptionsincreases flexibility but may impact existing implementations. Ensure compatibility and document the change in the migration guide.Would you like me to help document this change in the migration guide?
| import { Injectable } from '@nestjs/common'; | ||
| import { RuleRepository } from './rule.repository'; | ||
|
|
||
| @Injectable() | ||
| export class RuleService { | ||
| constructor(private readonly ruleRepository: RuleRepository) {} | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Well-structured service class for rule management.
The RuleService class is correctly set up with dependency injection for the RuleRepository. This follows NestJS best practices.
Consider adding service methods.
Currently, the service class does not contain any methods. Depending on the requirements, you might want to add methods to handle specific business logic related to rules.
Would you like me to help draft some of the service methods based on typical CRUD operations?
| import { Injectable } from '@nestjs/common'; | ||
| import { PrismaService } from '@/prisma/prisma.service'; | ||
|
|
||
| @Injectable() | ||
| export class RuleRepository { | ||
| constructor(protected readonly prisma: PrismaService) {} | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Well-structured repository class for rule management.
The RuleRepository class is set up correctly with dependency injection for the PrismaService. This is a good use of the repository pattern in a NestJS project.
Consider adding repository methods.
Currently, the repository class does not contain any methods. You might want to add methods for database interactions such as create, read, update, and delete operations for rules.
Would you like assistance in drafting some of these methods?
| import { Injectable } from '@nestjs/common'; | ||
| import { RiskRulePolicyRepository } from './risk-rule-policy.repository'; | ||
|
|
||
| @Injectable() | ||
| export class RiskRulePolicyService { | ||
| constructor(private readonly riskRuleSetRepository: RiskRulePolicyRepository) {} | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Well-structured service class for risk rule policy management.
The RiskRulePolicyService class is correctly set up with dependency injection for the RiskRulePolicyRepository. This follows NestJS best practices.
Consider adding service methods.
Currently, the service class does not contain any methods. Depending on the requirements, you might want to add methods to handle specific business logic related to risk rule policies.
Would you like me to help draft some of the service methods based on typical CRUD operations?
| async findRiskRulePolicyByWorkflowDefinitionId( | ||
| workflowDefinitionId: string, | ||
| projectIds: TProjectIds, | ||
| ) { | ||
| return this.prisma.riskRulesPolicy.findFirstOrThrow({ | ||
| where: { | ||
| workflowDefinitionRiskRulePolicies: { | ||
| some: { | ||
| workflowDefinitionId, | ||
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| select: { | ||
| riskRuleSets: true, | ||
| }, | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add project scoping to the query.
The method fetches data based on the workflow definition ID but does not scope the query to specific projects, which might lead to unauthorized data access.
- where: {
+ where: {
+ projectId: { in: projectIds },
workflowDefinitionRiskRulePolicies: {
some: {
workflowDefinitionId,
},
},
+ },Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| async findRiskRulePolicyByWorkflowDefinitionId( | |
| workflowDefinitionId: string, | |
| projectIds: TProjectIds, | |
| ) { | |
| return this.prisma.riskRulesPolicy.findFirstOrThrow({ | |
| where: { | |
| workflowDefinitionRiskRulePolicies: { | |
| some: { | |
| workflowDefinitionId, | |
| }, | |
| }, | |
| }, | |
| select: { | |
| riskRuleSets: true, | |
| }, | |
| }); | |
| async findRiskRulePolicyByWorkflowDefinitionId( | |
| workflowDefinitionId: string, | |
| projectIds: TProjectIds, | |
| ) { | |
| return this.prisma.riskRulesPolicy.findFirstOrThrow({ | |
| where: { | |
| projectId: { in: projectIds }, | |
| workflowDefinitionRiskRulePolicies: { | |
| some: { | |
| workflowDefinitionId, | |
| }, | |
| }, | |
| }, | |
| select: { | |
| riskRuleSets: true, | |
| }, | |
| }); |
| async findRiskRulePolicyById(id: string, projectIds: TProjectIds) { | ||
| return this.prisma.riskRulesPolicy.findUnique({ | ||
| where: { id }, | ||
| }); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider scoping the query to specific projects.
The method currently retrieves a risk rule policy by ID without considering the project scope. It might be beneficial to include a filter by projectIds to ensure data access is scoped correctly.
- where: { id },
+ where: { id, projectId: { in: projectIds } },Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| async findRiskRulePolicyById(id: string, projectIds: TProjectIds) { | |
| return this.prisma.riskRulesPolicy.findUnique({ | |
| where: { id }, | |
| }); | |
| } | |
| async findRiskRulePolicyById(id: string, projectIds: TProjectIds) { | |
| return this.prisma.riskRulesPolicy.findUnique({ | |
| where: { id, projectId: { in: projectIds } }, | |
| }); | |
| } |
| async findById( | ||
| id: string, | ||
| riskRulePolicyId: string, | ||
| args?: Prisma.RiskRuleSetFindFirstOrThrowArgs, | ||
| ) { | ||
| return await this.prisma.riskRuleSet.findFirstOrThrow({ | ||
| ...(args ? args : {}), | ||
| where: { ...(args?.where ? { ...args?.where } : {}), id: id, riskRulePolicyId }, | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Simplify the conditional logic in the findById method.
The current implementation can be simplified to enhance readability and maintainability.
- ...(args ? args : {}),
- where: { ...(args?.where ? { ...args?.where } : {}), id: id, riskRulePolicyId },
+ ...args,
+ where: { ...args?.where, id, riskRulePolicyId },Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| async findById( | |
| id: string, | |
| riskRulePolicyId: string, | |
| args?: Prisma.RiskRuleSetFindFirstOrThrowArgs, | |
| ) { | |
| return await this.prisma.riskRuleSet.findFirstOrThrow({ | |
| ...(args ? args : {}), | |
| where: { ...(args?.where ? { ...args?.where } : {}), id: id, riskRulePolicyId }, | |
| }); | |
| return await this.prisma.riskRuleSet.findFirstOrThrow({ | |
| ...args, | |
| where: { ...args?.where, id, riskRulePolicyId }, | |
| }); |
| async create(policyId: string, createRiskRuleSetData: Static<typeof CreateRiskRuleSchema>) { | ||
| return this.riskRuleSetRepository.create(policyId, { | ||
| ...createRiskRuleSetData, | ||
| rules: { | ||
| createMany: { | ||
| data: createRiskRuleSetData.ruleSet.rules.map(rule => ({ | ||
| operator: rule.operation, | ||
| engine: rule.engine, | ||
| comparisonValue: rule.value, | ||
| key: rule.key, | ||
| })), | ||
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add error handling for potential undefined properties in create method.
The function assumes createRiskRuleSetData.ruleSet.rules is always defined, which might not be the case. Adding error handling or default values can prevent runtime errors.
- data: createRiskRuleSetData.ruleSet.rules.map(rule => ({
+ data: createRiskRuleSetData.ruleSet?.rules?.map(rule => ({Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| async create(policyId: string, createRiskRuleSetData: Static<typeof CreateRiskRuleSchema>) { | |
| return this.riskRuleSetRepository.create(policyId, { | |
| ...createRiskRuleSetData, | |
| rules: { | |
| createMany: { | |
| data: createRiskRuleSetData.ruleSet.rules.map(rule => ({ | |
| operator: rule.operation, | |
| engine: rule.engine, | |
| comparisonValue: rule.value, | |
| key: rule.key, | |
| })), | |
| }, | |
| }, | |
| }); | |
| async create(policyId: string, createRiskRuleSetData: Static<typeof CreateRiskRuleSchema>) { | |
| return this.riskRuleSetRepository.create(policyId, { | |
| ...createRiskRuleSetData, | |
| rules: { | |
| createMany: { | |
| data: createRiskRuleSetData.ruleSet?.rules?.map(rule => ({ | |
| operator: rule.operation, | |
| engine: rule.engine, | |
| comparisonValue: rule.value, | |
| key: rule.key, | |
| })), | |
| }, | |
| }, | |
| }); |
| async findOne(id: string, policyId: string) { | ||
| const riskRuleSet = await this.riskRuleSetRepository.findById(id, policyId); | ||
|
|
||
| return riskRuleSet; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding error handling for not found cases in findOne method.
The function does not handle the scenario where riskRuleSet might be null or undefined after the fetch operation.
const riskRuleSet = await this.riskRuleSetRepository.findById(id, policyId);
+ if (!riskRuleSet) {
+ throw new NotFoundException(`RiskRuleSet with ID "${id}" not found`);
+ }
return riskRuleSet;Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| async findOne(id: string, policyId: string) { | |
| const riskRuleSet = await this.riskRuleSetRepository.findById(id, policyId); | |
| return riskRuleSet; | |
| } | |
| async findOne(id: string, policyId: string) { | |
| const riskRuleSet = await this.riskRuleSetRepository.findById(id, policyId); | |
| if (!riskRuleSet) { | |
| throw new NotFoundException(`RiskRuleSet with ID "${id}" not found`); | |
| } | |
| return riskRuleSet; | |
| } |
Blokh
changed the title
| @@ -0,0 +1,94 @@ | |||
| -- CreateEnum | |||
| CREATE TYPE "IndicatorRiskLevel" AS ENUM ('positive', 'moderate', 'critical'); | |||
|
|
||
| model RiskRuleSet { | ||
| id String @id @default(cuid()) | ||
| riskRulePolicyId String |
| // eslint-disable-next-line import/namespace | ||
| import { CreateRiskRuleSchema } from './create-risk-rule.schema'; | ||
|
|
||
| export const CreateRuleSetSchema = Type.Object({ |
| } | ||
|
|
||
| model Rule { | ||
| id String @id @default(cuid()) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (8)
- services/workflows-service/prisma/data-migrations (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/prisma/migrations/20240717150250_craete_rules_with_ruleset_and_policy/migration.sql (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/prisma/schema.prisma (5 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/project/project-scope.service.ts (2 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.repository.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-set/risk-rule-set.repository.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.repository.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.service.ts (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (6)
- services/workflows-service/prisma/data-migrations
- services/workflows-service/prisma/schema.prisma
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.repository.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-set/risk-rule-set.repository.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.repository.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.service.ts
Additional comments not posted (1)
services/workflows-service/prisma/migrations/20240717150250_craete_rules_with_ruleset_and_policy/migration.sql (1)
1-162: Comprehensive Review of SQL Migration FileThis migration file is well-structured and introduces several new components to the database schema:
- Enums:
IndicatorRiskLevel,RuleEngine,RulesetOperator. These are correctly defined.- Tables: Tables for
WorkflowDefinitionRiskRulePolicy,RiskRuleSetRule,RiskRulesPolicy,RiskRuleSet, andRule. Each table is properly defined with primary keys and appropriate data types.- Indexes: Various indexes are created to optimize query performance.
- Foreign Keys: Foreign keys are set up to maintain referential integrity.
- Checks: Constraints are added to ensure data consistency, such as the public/private status checks.
Overall, the SQL commands appear correct and efficient. However, ensure that:
- Performance: Indexes are appropriately used to optimize performance, especially for large datasets.
- Maintainability: The schema is maintainable and aligns with the project's data standards.
- Best Practices: All SQL practices such as naming conventions and data integrity are followed.
The SQL migration file is well-prepared and aligns with the project's requirements.
| scopeFindManyOrPublic<T>( | ||
| args?: Prisma.SelectSubset<T, PrismaGeneralQueryArgs>, | ||
| projectIds?: TProjectIds, | ||
| ): T { | ||
| // @ts-expect-error - dynamically typed for all queries | ||
| args ||= {}; | ||
| // @ts-expect-error - dynamically typed for all queries | ||
| args!.where = { | ||
| // @ts-expect-error - dynamically typed for all queries | ||
| ...args?.where, | ||
| OR: [ | ||
| { | ||
| project: { | ||
| id: {in: projectIds}, | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| isPublic: true | ||
| } | ||
| ] | ||
| , | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| return args!; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review: New method scopeFindManyOrPublic.
The method scopeFindManyOrPublic dynamically modifies the args object to include conditions for project IDs and public status. While the dynamic nature of the method allows flexibility, it could potentially lead to maintainability issues or bugs due to type mismatches.
- Correctness: The method correctly adds conditions to the
whereclause using anORlogic to handle both project-specific and public scopes. - Performance: Ensure that the dynamic addition of conditions does not lead to inefficient database queries, especially with large datasets.
- Best Practices: Consider adding more type safety or documentation to clarify the expected types and behaviors, especially since
@ts-expect-erroris used extensively.
Enhance type safety and reduce the reliance on @ts-expect-error.
| scopeFindOneOrPublic<T>( | ||
| args: Prisma.SelectSubset<T, PrismaGeneralQueryArgs>, | ||
| projectIds: TProjectIds, | ||
| ): T { | ||
| // @ts-expect-error | ||
| args.where = { | ||
| // @ts-expect-error | ||
| ...args.where, | ||
| OR: [ | ||
| { | ||
| project: { | ||
| id: {in: projectIds}, | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| isPublic: true | ||
| } | ||
| ], | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| return args as T; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review: New method scopeFindOneOrPublic.
Similar to scopeFindManyOrPublic, this method modifies the args object to handle single project scope retrievals based on conditions. The method uses the same dynamic typing approach.
- Correctness: The method correctly implements the logic to handle both project-specific and public scopes using an
ORcondition. - Performance: As with the previous method, ensure that the dynamic conditions do not impact the performance of database queries.
- Best Practices: The extensive use of
@ts-expect-errorindicates potential type mismatches. Consider improving type safety and documentation.
Improve type safety and documentation to clarify the dynamic behaviors and expected types.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 14
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (22)
- packages/workflow-core/src/lib/plugins/common-plugin/risk-rules-plugin.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/prisma/data-migrations (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/prisma/migrations/20240718140108_create_rule_policy/migration.sql (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/prisma/schema.prisma (5 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/helpers/type-box/type-string-enum.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/project/project-scope.service.ts (2 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.module.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.repository.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-set/risk-rule-set.module.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-set/risk-rule-set.repository.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-set/risk-rule-set.service.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-set/rule.controller.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-set/schemas/create-rule-set.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.controller.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.module.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.repository.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.service.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/schemas/assign-rule.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/schemas/create-rule.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/schemas/unassign-rule.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/schemas/update-rule.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/schemas/create-rule-set.schema.ts (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (11)
- services/workflows-service/prisma/schema.prisma
- services/workflows-service/src/helpers/type-box/type-string-enum.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/project/project-scope.service.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.module.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.repository.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-set/risk-rule-set.module.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-set/risk-rule-set.repository.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-set/risk-rule-set.service.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.module.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.service.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/schemas/create-rule-set.schema.ts
Additional comments not posted (15)
services/workflows-service/prisma/data-migrations (1)
1-1: Commit hash update approved.The subproject commit hash was updated to
27c48a7de4204ccb6c780b0d32c84e2822867277.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/schemas/assign-rule.schema.ts (1)
1-9: New schema definition approved.The
AssignRuleSchemais well-defined and uses theTypeBoxlibrary for type validation. The description for theriskRuleSetIdfield is clear.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/schemas/unassign-rule.schema.ts (1)
1-9: New schema definition approved.The
UnassignRuleSchemais well-defined and uses theTypeBoxlibrary for type validation. The description for theriskRuleSetIdfield is clear.services/workflows-service/prisma/migrations/20240718140108_create_rule_policy/migration.sql (2)
1-7: Verify potential impact of the migration.The migration includes warnings about dropping the
operatorcolumn and adding a requiredoperationcolumn without a default value. Ensure that these changes do not cause data loss or issues if the table is not empty.
8-13: Review database migration changes.The migration drops an index and alters the
Ruletable by dropping theoperatorcolumn and adding theoperationcolumn. Ensure that these changes are correctly handled in the application logic and that any data migration scripts are in place if needed.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-set/schemas/create-rule-set.schema.ts (2)
1-4: Imports look good.The imports are necessary and correctly referenced.
6-15: Schema definition is correct.The
CreateRuleSetSchemais well-defined with appropriate types and descriptions.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/schemas/create-rule.schema.ts (2)
1-4: Imports look good.The imports are necessary and correctly referenced.
5-25: Schema definition is correct.The
CreateRuleSchemais well-defined with appropriate types and descriptions.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/schemas/update-rule.schema.ts (2)
1-4: Imports look good.The imports are necessary and correctly referenced.
5-32: Schema definition is correct.The
UpdateRuleSchemais well-defined with appropriate types and descriptions.packages/workflow-core/src/lib/plugins/common-plugin/risk-rules-plugin.ts (1)
55-58: Conditional assignment looks good.The conditional assignment for
databaseIdbased on thesourceproperty is correctly implemented.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.repository.ts (1)
9-12: Well-structured constructor.The constructor correctly initializes
PrismaServiceandProjectScopeServiceusing dependency injection.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-set/rule.controller.ts (1)
21-21: Well-structured constructor.The constructor correctly initializes
RuleServiceusing dependency injection.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.controller.ts (1)
21-21: Well-structured constructor.The constructor correctly initializes
RuleServiceusing dependency injection.
| async create( | ||
| createArgs: Omit<Prisma.RuleUncheckedCreateInput, 'riskRuleSetId' | 'projectId' | 'isPublic'>, | ||
| projectId: string, | ||
| ) { | ||
| return this.prisma.rule.create({ | ||
| data: { ...createArgs, projectId, isPublic: false }, | ||
| }); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding error handling.
The create method lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions.
+ try {
return this.prisma.rule.create({
data: { ...createArgs, projectId, isPublic: false },
});
+ } catch (error) {
+ // Handle error appropriately
+ throw new Error('Failed to create rule');
+ }Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
| async assignRuleToRuleset(ruleId: string, riskRuleSetId: string) { | ||
| return this.prisma.riskRuleSetRule.create({ | ||
| data: { | ||
| riskRuleSetId, | ||
| ruleId, | ||
| }, | ||
| }); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding error handling.
The assignRuleToRuleset method lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions.
+ try {
return this.prisma.riskRuleSetRule.create({
data: {
riskRuleSetId,
ruleId,
},
});
+ } catch (error) {
+ // Handle error appropriately
+ throw new Error('Failed to assign rule to ruleset');
+ }Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| async assignRuleToRuleset(ruleId: string, riskRuleSetId: string) { | |
| return this.prisma.riskRuleSetRule.create({ | |
| data: { | |
| riskRuleSetId, | |
| ruleId, | |
| }, | |
| }); | |
| } | |
| async assignRuleToRuleset(ruleId: string, riskRuleSetId: string) { | |
| try { | |
| return this.prisma.riskRuleSetRule.create({ | |
| data: { | |
| riskRuleSetId, | |
| ruleId, | |
| }, | |
| }); | |
| } catch (error) { | |
| // Handle error appropriately | |
| throw new Error('Failed to assign rule to ruleset'); | |
| } | |
| } |
| async deleteById(id: string, projectIds: TProjectIds) { | ||
| return this.prisma.riskRuleSet.delete( | ||
| this.scopeService.scopeDelete( | ||
| { | ||
| where: { | ||
| id: id, | ||
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| projectIds, | ||
| ), | ||
| ); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding error handling.
The deleteById method lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions.
+ try {
return this.prisma.riskRuleSet.delete(
this.scopeService.scopeDelete(
{
where: {
id: id,
},
},
projectIds,
),
);
+ } catch (error) {
+ // Handle error appropriately
+ throw new Error('Failed to delete rule by ID');
+ }Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| async deleteById(id: string, projectIds: TProjectIds) { | |
| return this.prisma.riskRuleSet.delete( | |
| this.scopeService.scopeDelete( | |
| { | |
| where: { | |
| id: id, | |
| }, | |
| }, | |
| projectIds, | |
| ), | |
| ); | |
| } | |
| async deleteById(id: string, projectIds: TProjectIds) { | |
| try { | |
| return this.prisma.riskRuleSet.delete( | |
| this.scopeService.scopeDelete( | |
| { | |
| where: { | |
| id: id, | |
| }, | |
| }, | |
| projectIds, | |
| ), | |
| ); | |
| } catch (error) { | |
| // Handle error appropriately | |
| throw new Error('Failed to delete rule by ID'); | |
| } | |
| } |
| async unassignRuleFromRuleset(ruleId: string, riskRuleSetId: string) { | ||
| return this.prisma.riskRuleSetRule.delete({ | ||
| where: { | ||
| riskRuleSetId_ruleId: { | ||
| ruleId, | ||
| riskRuleSetId, | ||
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding error handling.
The unassignRuleFromRuleset method lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions.
+ try {
return this.prisma.riskRuleSetRule.delete({
where: {
riskRuleSetId_ruleId: {
ruleId,
riskRuleSetId,
},
},
});
+ } catch (error) {
+ // Handle error appropriately
+ throw new Error('Failed to unassign rule from ruleset');
+ }Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| async unassignRuleFromRuleset(ruleId: string, riskRuleSetId: string) { | |
| return this.prisma.riskRuleSetRule.delete({ | |
| where: { | |
| riskRuleSetId_ruleId: { | |
| ruleId, | |
| riskRuleSetId, | |
| }, | |
| }, | |
| }); | |
| async unassignRuleFromRuleset(ruleId: string, riskRuleSetId: string) { | |
| try { | |
| return this.prisma.riskRuleSetRule.delete({ | |
| where: { | |
| riskRuleSetId_ruleId: { | |
| ruleId, | |
| riskRuleSetId, | |
| }, | |
| }, | |
| }); | |
| } catch (error) { | |
| // Handle error appropriately | |
| throw new Error('Failed to unassign rule from ruleset'); | |
| } |
| async findMany(projectIds: TProjectIds, args?: Prisma.RuleFindManyArgs) { | ||
| return this.prisma.rule.findMany( | ||
| this.scopeService.scopeFindManyOrPublic( | ||
| { | ||
| ...args, | ||
| where: { ...args?.where }, | ||
| }, | ||
| projectIds, | ||
| ), | ||
| ); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding error handling.
The findMany method lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions.
+ try {
return this.prisma.rule.findMany(
this.scopeService.scopeFindManyOrPublic(
{
...args,
where: { ...args?.where },
},
projectIds,
),
);
+ } catch (error) {
+ // Handle error appropriately
+ throw new Error('Failed to find rules');
+ }Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| async findMany(projectIds: TProjectIds, args?: Prisma.RuleFindManyArgs) { | |
| return this.prisma.rule.findMany( | |
| this.scopeService.scopeFindManyOrPublic( | |
| { | |
| ...args, | |
| where: { ...args?.where }, | |
| }, | |
| projectIds, | |
| ), | |
| ); | |
| } | |
| async findMany(projectIds: TProjectIds, args?: Prisma.RuleFindManyArgs) { | |
| try { | |
| return this.prisma.rule.findMany( | |
| this.scopeService.scopeFindManyOrPublic( | |
| { | |
| ...args, | |
| where: { ...args?.where }, | |
| }, | |
| projectIds, | |
| ), | |
| ); | |
| } catch (error) { | |
| // Handle error appropriately | |
| throw new Error('Failed to find rules'); | |
| } | |
| } |
| async updateRule( | ||
| @common.Query() ruleId: string, | ||
| @common.Body() updateRuleSchema: TUpdateRule, | ||
| @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds, | ||
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | ||
| ) { | ||
| const rule = await this.ruleService.updateRule({ | ||
| ruleId, | ||
| ruleData: updateRuleSchema, | ||
| projectId: currentProjectId, | ||
| projectIds, | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| return rule as TUpdateRule; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding error handling.
The updateRule endpoint lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions.
+ try {
const rule = await this.ruleService.updateRule({
ruleId,
ruleData: updateRuleSchema,
projectId: currentProjectId,
projectIds,
});
return rule as TUpdateRule;
+ } catch (error) {
+ // Handle error appropriately
+ throw new Error('Failed to update rule');
+ }Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| async updateRule( | |
| @common.Query() ruleId: string, | |
| @common.Body() updateRuleSchema: TUpdateRule, | |
| @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds, | |
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | |
| ) { | |
| const rule = await this.ruleService.updateRule({ | |
| ruleId, | |
| ruleData: updateRuleSchema, | |
| projectId: currentProjectId, | |
| projectIds, | |
| }); | |
| return rule as TUpdateRule; | |
| } | |
| async updateRule( | |
| @common.Query() ruleId: string, | |
| @common.Body() updateRuleSchema: TUpdateRule, | |
| @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds, | |
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | |
| ) { | |
| try { | |
| const rule = await this.ruleService.updateRule({ | |
| ruleId, | |
| ruleData: updateRuleSchema, | |
| projectId: currentProjectId, | |
| projectIds, | |
| }); | |
| return rule as TUpdateRule; | |
| } catch (error) { | |
| // Handle error appropriately | |
| throw new Error('Failed to update rule'); | |
| } | |
| } |
| @Delete('/:ruleId') | ||
| @Validate({ | ||
| request: [ | ||
| { | ||
| type: 'param', | ||
| name: 'ruleId', | ||
| schema: Type.String(), | ||
| }, | ||
| ], | ||
| response: Type.Any(), | ||
| }) | ||
| async deleteRule(@common.Query() ruleId: string, @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds) { | ||
| await this.ruleService.deleteRule({ ruleId, projectIds }); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding error handling.
The deleteRule endpoint lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions.
+ try {
await this.ruleService.deleteRule({ ruleId, projectIds });
+ } catch (error) {
+ // Handle error appropriately
+ throw new Error('Failed to delete rule');
+ }Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| @Delete('/:ruleId') | |
| @Validate({ | |
| request: [ | |
| { | |
| type: 'param', | |
| name: 'ruleId', | |
| schema: Type.String(), | |
| }, | |
| ], | |
| response: Type.Any(), | |
| }) | |
| async deleteRule(@common.Query() ruleId: string, @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds) { | |
| await this.ruleService.deleteRule({ ruleId, projectIds }); | |
| } | |
| async deleteRule(@common.Query() ruleId: string, @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds) { | |
| try { | |
| await this.ruleService.deleteRule({ ruleId, projectIds }); | |
| } catch (error) { | |
| // Handle error appropriately | |
| throw new Error('Failed to delete rule'); | |
| } | |
| } |
| async assignRuleToRuleset( | ||
| @common.Query() ruleId: string, | ||
| @common.Body() assignRuleDate: TAssignRule, | ||
| @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds, | ||
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | ||
| ) { | ||
| const rule = await this.ruleService.assignRuleToRuleset( | ||
| ruleId, | ||
| assignRuleDate.riskRuleSetId, | ||
| currentProjectId, | ||
| projectIds, | ||
| ); | ||
|
|
||
| return { | ||
| ruleId: rule.id, | ||
| ...assignRuleDate, | ||
| }; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding error handling.
The assignRuleToRuleset endpoint lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions.
+ try {
const rule = await this.ruleService.assignRuleToRuleset(
ruleId,
assignRuleDate.riskRuleSetId,
currentProjectId,
projectIds,
);
return {
ruleId: rule.id,
...assignRuleDate,
};
+ } catch (error) {
+ // Handle error appropriately
+ throw new Error('Failed to assign rule to ruleset');
+ }Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| async assignRuleToRuleset( | |
| @common.Query() ruleId: string, | |
| @common.Body() assignRuleDate: TAssignRule, | |
| @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds, | |
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | |
| ) { | |
| const rule = await this.ruleService.assignRuleToRuleset( | |
| ruleId, | |
| assignRuleDate.riskRuleSetId, | |
| currentProjectId, | |
| projectIds, | |
| ); | |
| return { | |
| ruleId: rule.id, | |
| ...assignRuleDate, | |
| }; | |
| } | |
| async assignRuleToRuleset( | |
| @common.Query() ruleId: string, | |
| @common.Body() assignRuleDate: TAssignRule, | |
| @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds, | |
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | |
| ) { | |
| try { | |
| const rule = await this.ruleService.assignRuleToRuleset( | |
| ruleId, | |
| assignRuleDate.riskRuleSetId, | |
| currentProjectId, | |
| projectIds, | |
| ); | |
| return { | |
| ruleId: rule.id, | |
| ...assignRuleDate, | |
| }; | |
| } catch (error) { | |
| // Handle error appropriately | |
| throw new Error('Failed to assign rule to ruleset'); | |
| } | |
| } |
| async unassignRule( | ||
| @common.Query() ruleId: string, | ||
| @common.Body() unassignRule: TUnassignRule, | ||
| @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds, | ||
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | ||
| ) { | ||
| const rule = await this.ruleService.unassignRuleFromRuleset( | ||
| ruleId, | ||
| unassignRule.riskRuleSetId, | ||
| currentProjectId, | ||
| projectIds, | ||
| ); | ||
|
|
||
| return { | ||
| ruleId: rule.id, | ||
| ...unassignRule, | ||
| }; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding error handling.
The unassignRule endpoint lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions.
+ try {
const rule = await this.ruleService.unassignRuleFromRuleset(
ruleId,
unassignRule.riskRuleSetId,
currentProjectId,
projectIds,
);
return {
ruleId: rule.id,
...unassignRule,
};
+ } catch (error) {
+ // Handle error appropriately
+ throw new Error('Failed to unassign rule from ruleset');
+ }Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| async unassignRule( | |
| @common.Query() ruleId: string, | |
| @common.Body() unassignRule: TUnassignRule, | |
| @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds, | |
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | |
| ) { | |
| const rule = await this.ruleService.unassignRuleFromRuleset( | |
| ruleId, | |
| unassignRule.riskRuleSetId, | |
| currentProjectId, | |
| projectIds, | |
| ); | |
| return { | |
| ruleId: rule.id, | |
| ...unassignRule, | |
| }; | |
| } | |
| async unassignRule( | |
| @common.Query() ruleId: string, | |
| @common.Body() unassignRule: TUnassignRule, | |
| @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds, | |
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | |
| ) { | |
| try { | |
| const rule = await this.ruleService.unassignRuleFromRuleset( | |
| ruleId, | |
| unassignRule.riskRuleSetId, | |
| currentProjectId, | |
| projectIds, | |
| ); | |
| return { | |
| ruleId: rule.id, | |
| ...unassignRule, | |
| }; | |
| } catch (error) { | |
| // Handle error appropriately | |
| throw new Error('Failed to unassign rule from ruleset'); | |
| } | |
| } |
| async createRule( | ||
| @common.Body() data: TCreateRule, | ||
| @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds, | ||
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | ||
| ) { | ||
| return (await this.ruleService.createNewRule({ | ||
| ruleData: data, | ||
| projectId: currentProjectId, | ||
| riskRuleSetId: data.riskRuleSetId, | ||
| })) as TCreateRule & { id: string }; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding error handling.
The createRule endpoint lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions.
+ try {
return (await this.ruleService.createNewRule({
ruleData: data,
projectId: currentProjectId,
riskRuleSetId: data.riskRuleSetId,
})) as TCreateRule & { id: string };
+ } catch (error) {
+ // Handle error appropriately
+ throw new Error('Failed to create rule');
+ }Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| async createRule( | |
| @common.Body() data: TCreateRule, | |
| @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds, | |
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | |
| ) { | |
| return (await this.ruleService.createNewRule({ | |
| ruleData: data, | |
| projectId: currentProjectId, | |
| riskRuleSetId: data.riskRuleSetId, | |
| })) as TCreateRule & { id: string }; | |
| } | |
| async createRule( | |
| @common.Body() data: TCreateRule, | |
| @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds, | |
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | |
| ) { | |
| try { | |
| return (await this.ruleService.createNewRule({ | |
| ruleData: data, | |
| projectId: currentProjectId, | |
| riskRuleSetId: data.riskRuleSetId, | |
| })) as TCreateRule & { id: string }; | |
| } catch (error) { | |
| // Handle error appropriately | |
| throw new Error('Failed to create rule'); | |
| } | |
| } |
# Conflicts: # packages/common/src/rule-engine/types.ts # services/workflows-service/prisma/data-migrations # services/workflows-service/src/app.module.ts # services/workflows-service/src/project/project-scope.service.ts
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (1)
- packages/common/src/rule-engine/types.ts (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (3)
packages/common/src/rule-engine/types.ts (3)
21-24: LGTM! The new typeTNotionRulesOptionsis well-defined.The type includes
databaseIdandsourceproperties, which are essential for Notion-specific rule options.
26-29: LGTM! The new typeTDatabaseRulesOptionsis well-defined.The type includes
policyIdandsourceproperties, which are essential for database-specific rule options.
31-31: LGTM! The redefinition ofTFindAllRulesOptionsenhances flexibility and clarity.The union type effectively consolidates the options for finding rules from different sources.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 21
Outside diff range, codebase verification and nitpick comments (7)
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/schemas/assign-rule-set.schema.ts (1)
1-9: Consider improving the naming convention for the type alias.The type alias
TassignToParentRuleSetcould be renamed toTAssignToParentRuleSetfor consistency with typical TypeScript naming conventions.- export type TassignToParentRuleSet = Static<typeof AssignRuleSetToParentRuleSet>; + export type TAssignToParentRuleSet = Static<typeof AssignRuleSetToParentRuleSet>;services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/consts/rule-set-depth-of-3-with-rules.ts (1)
3-48: Consider simplifying or documenting the nested structure.The deeply nested structure is correct but may impact readability and maintainability. Consider adding comments or documentation to explain the purpose and usage.
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/helpers/rule-set-search-and-flatten-values.ts (2)
16-28: Consider simplifying or documenting the nested structure.The deeply nested structure is correct but may impact readability and maintainability. Consider adding comments or documentation to explain the purpose and usage.
30-48: Add comments to clarify the recursive logic.The recursive logic in
extractRiskRulePolicyis correct but could benefit from additional comments to enhance readability and understanding.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/json.json (1)
54-55: Consider specifying allowed values fortype.The
typefield has a default value of "business". If there are specific allowed values, consider using anenumto enforce this.- "type": "string", + "type": "string", + "enum": ["business", "otherAllowedType"]services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/rule.controller.ts (2)
23-43: Consider Adding Error Handling increateNewRuleMethodThe
createNewRulemethod inRuleServicerelies on thecreatemethod ofRuleRepository, which does not explicitly handle errors. It would be beneficial to add error handling to manage potential exceptions from the Prisma service.
- File:
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.service.ts- Method:
createNewRuleAnalysis chain
createRulemethod is well-structured.The method uses appropriate validation and interacts with the service correctly.
Ensure that
createNewRuleinRuleServicehandles errors properly and returns the expected data structure.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify error handling in `createNewRule` method of `RuleService`. # Test: Search for the `createNewRule` method implementation. Expect: Proper error handling and return structure. ast-grep --lang typescript --pattern $'class RuleService { $$$ createNewRule($_) { $$$ } $$$ }'Length of output: 11044
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify error handling in `create` method of `RuleRepository`. # Test: Search for the `create` method implementation in `RuleRepository`. Expect: Proper error handling. ast-grep --lang typescript --pattern $'class RuleRepository { $$$ create($_) { $$$ } $$$ }'Length of output: 28868
45-77: Add error handling toassignRuleToRulesetinRuleService.The method currently lacks explicit error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions in cases such as rule not found or database operation failures. Consider implementing try-catch blocks or other error handling mechanisms to ensure robustness.
- Location:
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.service.ts, lines 30-58Analysis chain
assignRuleToRulesetmethod is well-structured.The method uses appropriate validation and interacts with the service correctly.
Ensure that
assignRuleToRulesetinRuleServicehandles errors properly and returns the expected data structure.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify error handling in `assignRuleToRuleset` method of `RuleService`. # Test: Search for the `assignRuleToRuleset` method implementation. Expect: Proper error handling and return structure. ast-grep --lang typescript --pattern $'class RuleService { $$$ assignRuleToRuleset($_, $_, $_, $_) { $$$ } $$$ }'Length of output: 11062
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for error handling in `assignRuleToRuleset` method of `RuleService`. # Test: Search for try-catch blocks or error handling logic in the `assignRuleToRuleset` method. rg --context 5 'assignRuleToRuleset' --type=typescriptLength of output: 89
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for error handling in `assignRuleToRuleset` method of `RuleService`. # Test: Search for try-catch blocks or error handling logic in the `assignRuleToRuleset` method. rg --context 5 'assignRuleToRuleset' --glob '*.ts'Length of output: 4400
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (25)
- services/workflows-service/prisma/migrations/20240808102902_create_risk_ruleset/migration.sql (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/prisma/schema.prisma (4 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/consts/rule-set-depth-of-3-with-rules.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/consts/rule-set-parent-depth-3-with-policies.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/helpers/rule-set-search-and-flatten-values.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/json.json (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/risk-rule.module.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/risk-rule.repository.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/risk-rule.service.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/rule.controller.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/schemas/create-rule-set.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/rule-set.controller.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/rule-set.module.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/rule-set.repository.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/rule-set.service.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/schemas/assign-rule-set.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/schemas/create-rule-set.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/schemas/unassign-rule-set.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/schemas/update-rule-set.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.controller.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.repository.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.service.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/schemas/assign-rule.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/schemas/create-rule.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/schemas/unassign-ruleset-from-parent.schema.ts (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (71)
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/schemas/assign-rule.schema.ts (1)
1-9: LGTM!The schema and type alias are correctly defined for assigning a rule to a rule set.
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/schemas/unassign-rule-set.schema.ts (1)
1-9: LGTM!The schema and type alias are correctly defined for unassigning a rule set.
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/schemas/unassign-ruleset-from-parent.schema.ts (1)
1-9: Schema Definition Looks Good!The schema and type definition are correctly implemented using
@sinclair/typebox. The use ofType.StringforparentRuleSetIdis appropriate.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/schemas/create-rule-set.schema.ts (1)
1-10: Schema Definition Looks Good!The schema for creating a ruleset is well-structured. The use of
Type.EnumforoperatorandType.OptionalforparentRuleSetIdis appropriate.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/schemas/create-rule-set.schema.ts (1)
1-15: Schema Definition Looks Good!The schema for creating a rule set is correctly implemented. The use of
TypeStringEnumfor theoperatorandType.Arrayforrulesis appropriate. The description adds clarity to the schema's purpose.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/risk-rule.module.ts (1)
8-13: Module Configuration Looks Good.The module is correctly configured with necessary imports and providers. Ensure that all services and repositories are implemented and tested.
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/rule-set.module.ts (1)
9-15: Module Configuration Looks Good.The module is well-configured with necessary controllers, imports, and providers. Ensure that the controller and services are properly implemented and tested.
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/schemas/create-rule.schema.ts (1)
5-25: Schema Definition Looks Good.The
CreateRuleSchemais well-defined with clear descriptions and examples for each field. Ensure that all fields are validated correctly in the application.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/schemas/update-rule-set.schema.ts (6)
6-10: LGTM!The
namefield is well-defined with a clear description and example.
12-16: LGTM!The
keyfield is well-defined with a clear description and example.
18-20: LGTM!The
operationfield is well-defined usingTypeStringEnum, with a clear description and default value.
21-25: LGTM!The
comparisonValuefield is well-defined with a clear description and example.
27-29: LGTM!The
enginefield is well-defined usingTypeStringEnum, with a clear description and default value.
32-32: LGTM!The type
TUpdateRuleis correctly defined usingStaticfrom TypeBox.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/helpers/rule-set-search-and-flatten-values.ts (3)
4-6: LGTM!The type
RiskRuleWithPolicyis correctly defined and extendsRiskRuleappropriately.
8-10: LGTM!The type
RiskRuleRuleSetWithRuleis correctly defined and extendsRiskRuleRuleSetappropriately.
12-14: LGTM!The type
RuleSetWithRiskRulesis correctly defined and extendsRuleSetappropriately.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/json.json (2)
3-8: Ensure completeness of required fields.The
requiredarray specifies fields that must be present. Verify that all necessary fields for your application logic are included here.
37-39: Validate email format.The
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/rule-set.service.ts (6)
19-25: LGTM!The
findManyByRulesetmethod is well-implemented and correctly uses the repository to fetch data.
27-29: LGTM!The
findManymethod is well-implemented, allowing for optional arguments to customize the query.
31-36: LGTM!The
findAssociatedRiskPolciesmethod is well-implemented, effectively utilizing helper functions to process and return data.
38-43: LGTM!The
assignRuleSetToParentRulesetmethod is correctly implemented, delegating the task to the repository.
45-53: LGTM!The
unassignRuleFromRulesetmethod is correctly implemented, using the repository to perform the operation.
99-107: LGTM!The
deleteRulemethod is correctly implemented, ensuring that public rules cannot be deleted.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.service.ts (4)
14-24: LGTM!The
findManyByRulesetmethod is well-implemented and correctly uses the repository to fetch data.
26-28: LGTM!The
findManymethod is well-implemented, allowing for optional arguments to customize the query.
30-57: Clarify the logic forruleProjectId.The logic for checking
ruleProjectIdinassignRuleToRulesetseems incomplete. Consider verifying if the rule should be connected or created based onruleProjectId.
117-125: LGTM!The
deleteRulemethod is correctly implemented, ensuring that public rules cannot be deleted.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/risk-rule.repository.ts (5)
41-65: LGTM!The
findManymethod is well-implemented, using the scope service to handle scoped queries effectively.
83-98: LGTM!The
updateByIdmethod is well-implemented, ensuring that updates are correctly handled.
101-119: LGTM!The
connectToRulesetmethod is well-implemented, using Prisma's upsert operation effectively.
123-135: LGTM!The
disconnectFromRulesetmethod is well-implemented, using Prisma's delete operation effectively.
138-149: LGTM!The
deleteByIdmethod is well-implemented, using the scope service to handle scoped deletions effectively.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.repository.ts (7)
14-39: Consider adding error handling tocreatemethod.The
createmethod lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions. Consider wrapping the Prisma call in a try-catch block.
41-54: Consider adding error handling tofindManymethod.The
findManymethod lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions. Consider wrapping the Prisma call in a try-catch block.
56-70: Consider adding error handling tofindByIdmethod.The
findByIdmethod lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions. Consider wrapping the Prisma call in a try-catch block.
72-87: Consider adding error handling toupdateByIdmethod.The
updateByIdmethod lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions. Consider wrapping the Prisma call in a try-catch block.
90-109: Consider adding error handling toconnectToRulesetmethod.The
connectToRulesetmethod lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions. Consider wrapping the Prisma call in a try-catch block.
112-124: Consider adding error handling todisconnectFromRulesetmethod.The
disconnectFromRulesetmethod lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions. Consider wrapping the Prisma call in a try-catch block.
126-137: Consider adding error handling todeleteByIdmethod.The
deleteByIdmethod lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions. Consider wrapping the Prisma call in a try-catch block.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.controller.ts (1)
34-44: Consider adding error handling tocreateRulemethod.The
createRulemethod lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions. Consider wrapping the service call in a try-catch block.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/rule.controller.ts (3)
1-20: Imports and class declaration look good.The imports are relevant and well-organized, and the class is correctly set up as a NestJS controller.
113-157:updateRuleanddeleteRulemethods are well-structured.Both methods use appropriate validation and interact with the service correctly.
Ensure that
updateRuleanddeleteRuleinRuleServicehandle errors properly and return the expected data structure.Verification successful
Error Handling in
updateRuleanddeleteRuleMethods VerifiedBoth methods in
RuleServiceappropriately handle errors by checking if a rule is public before proceeding with updates or deletions. They throw aBadRequestExceptionwhen necessary, ensuring that public rules are protected from modification or deletion.
updateRulemethod: Ensures public rules are not updated.deleteRulemethod: Ensures public rules are not deleted.These implementations align with expected behavior and error handling practices.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify error handling in `updateRule` and `deleteRule` methods of `RuleService`. # Test: Search for the `updateRule` method implementation. Expect: Proper error handling and return structure. ast-grep --lang typescript --pattern $'class RuleService { $$$ updateRule($_) { $$$ } $$$ }' # Test: Search for the `deleteRule` method implementation. Expect: Proper error handling and return structure. ast-grep --lang typescript --pattern $'class RuleService { $$$ deleteRule($_) { $$$ } $$$ }'Length of output: 22083
79-111:unassignRulemethod is well-structured.The method uses appropriate validation and interacts with the service correctly.
Ensure that
unassignRuleFromRulesetinRuleServicehandles errors properly and returns the expected data structure.Verification successful
Verification Complete:
unassignRuleFromRulesetMethodThe
unassignRuleFromRulesetmethod inRuleServicecorrectly handles errors and returns the expected data structure by relying on thedisconnectFromRulesetmethod inRuleRepository, which performs the deletion operation and returns the deleted record. No further issues were found.
- The
disconnectFromRulesetmethod uses Prisma to delete the association, which will throw an error if the entry does not exist, ensuring proper error handling.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify error handling in `unassignRuleFromRuleset` method of `RuleService`. # Test: Search for the `unassignRuleFromRuleset` method implementation. Expect: Proper error handling and return structure. ast-grep --lang typescript --pattern $'class RuleService { $$$ unassignRuleFromRuleset($_, $_, $_, $_) { $$$ } $$$ }'Length of output: 11066
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the implementation of `disconnectFromRuleset` in `ruleRepository`. # Test: Search for the `disconnectFromRuleset` method implementation. Expect: Proper return structure. ast-grep --lang typescript --pattern $'class RuleRepository { $$$ disconnectFromRuleset($_, $_) { $$$ } $$$ }'Length of output: 28887
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/rule-set.repository.ts (8)
76-93:findByIdmethod is well-structured.The method uses scoped queries to find a ruleset by ID with optional additional arguments.
Ensure that the scoped queries are correctly implemented and secure.
95-111:findManymethod is well-structured.The method uses scoped queries to find multiple rulesets with optional arguments.
Ensure that the scoped queries are correctly implemented and secure.
114-129:updateByIdmethod is well-structured.The method uses Prisma to update a ruleset by ID.
Ensure that input validation and error handling are implemented in the service layer.
132-157:connectToRulesetanddisconnectFromRulesetmethods are well-structured.The methods use Prisma to manage connections between rulesets.
Ensure that input validation and error handling are implemented in the service layer.
159-170:deleteByIdmethod is well-structured.The method uses scoped queries to delete a ruleset by ID.
Ensure that the scoped queries are correctly implemented and secure.
172-209:findAllAssociatedPoliciesandfindAssociatedRulesetsAndDefinitionsmethods are well-structured.The methods use Prisma to find associated policies and rulesets.
Ensure that the queries are correctly implemented and secure.
55-74:findManyByRiskRulemethod is well-structured.The method uses scoped queries to find rulesets associated with a specific risk rule.
Ensure that the scoped queries are correctly implemented and secure.
Verification successful
scopeFindOneOrPublicmethod implementation verified.The method correctly scopes queries to include projects with specific IDs or public visibility. However, the use of
@ts-expect-errorshould be reviewed to ensure it doesn't mask significant type-checking issues.
- Location:
services/workflows-service/src/project/project-scope.service.tsScripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify scoped query implementation for `findManyByRiskRule`. # Test: Search for the `scopeFindOneOrPublic` method implementation. Expect: Correct and secure implementation. ast-grep --lang typescript --pattern $'class ProjectScopeService { $$$ scopeFindOneOrPublic($_, $_) { $$$ } $$$ }'Length of output: 129
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Search for the `scopeFindOneOrPublic` method to verify its existence and implementation. # Use `rg` to locate the `scopeFindOneOrPublic` method. rg 'scopeFindOneOrPublic' --context 5Length of output: 9183
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Extract the full implementation of the `scopeFindOneOrPublic` method. # Use `ast-grep` to extract the method from `project-scope.service.ts`. ast-grep --lang typescript --pattern $'class ProjectScopeService { $$$ scopeFindOneOrPublic($_, $_) { $$$ } $$$ }'Length of output: 129
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Use `rg` to capture the full implementation of `scopeFindOneOrPublic` in `project-scope.service.ts`. # Search for `scopeFindOneOrPublic` in `project-scope.service.ts` with extended context. rg 'scopeFindOneOrPublic' --context 20 services/workflows-service/src/project/project-scope.service.tsLength of output: 820
19-53:createmethod is well-structured.The method uses Prisma for database interaction and handles optional associations correctly.
Ensure that input validation and error handling are implemented in the service layer.
services/workflows-service/prisma/migrations/20240808102902_create_risk_ruleset/migration.sql (8)
1-8: ENUM creation statements are well-defined.The ENUM types
IndicatorRiskLevel,RuleEngine, andRulesetOperatorare appropriate for the domain.
10-20:RiskRulesPolicytable structure is appropriate.The table includes necessary fields and a primary key constraint.
Ensure that
projectIdis indexed for performance.
22-41:RiskRuletable structure is appropriate.The table includes necessary fields and a primary key constraint.
Ensure that
riskRulePolicyIdis indexed for performance.
43-52:RiskRuleRuleSettable structure is appropriate.The table includes necessary fields and a primary key constraint.
Ensure that
riskRuleIdandruleSetIdare indexed for performance.
54-65:RuleSettable structure is appropriate.The table includes necessary fields and a primary key constraint.
Ensure that
projectIdis indexed for performance.
67-76:RuleSetToRuleSettable structure is appropriate.The table includes necessary fields and a primary key constraint.
Ensure that
parentIdandchildIdare indexed for performance.
78-87:RuleSetRuletable structure is appropriate.The table includes necessary fields and a primary key constraint.
Ensure that
ruleIdandruleSetIdare indexed for performance.
89-103:Ruletable structure is appropriate.The table includes necessary fields and a primary key constraint.
Ensure that
projectIdis indexed for performance.services/workflows-service/prisma/schema.prisma (10)
820-824: EnumIndicatorRiskLeveladded successfully.The addition of
IndicatorRiskLevelwith valuespositive,moderate, andcriticalis well-structured and enhances risk categorization.
875-878: EnumRuleEngineadded successfully.The addition of
RuleEnginewith valuesBallerineandJsonLogicprovides flexibility in rule engine selection.
880-883: EnumRulesetOperatoradded successfully.The addition of
RulesetOperatorwith valuesandandoris essential for logical rule combinations.
924-937: ModelRiskRulesPolicyadded successfully.The
RiskRulesPolicymodel is well-structured with essential fields and relationships for managing risk rule policies.
939-965: ModelRiskRuleadded successfully.The
RiskRulemodel is comprehensive, with fields for rule definition and relationships for effective risk assessment.
967-981: ModelRiskRuleRuleSetadded successfully.The
RiskRuleRuleSetmodel effectively establishes relationships between risk rules and rule sets, aiding in complex rule management.
983-999: ModelRuleSetadded successfully.The
RuleSetmodel is well-structured, supporting hierarchical rule management with necessary fields and relationships.
1001-1014: ModelRuleSetToRuleSetadded successfully.The
RuleSetToRuleSetmodel facilitates hierarchical relationships between rule sets, aiding in advanced rule management.
1016-1030: ModelRuleSetRuleadded successfully.The
RuleSetRulemodel is essential for linking individual rules to rule sets, supporting structured rule management.
1032-1048: ModelRuleadded successfully.The
Rulemodel is comprehensive, supporting rule definition with necessary fields and relationships for effective rule processing.
| export const RULESET_PARENT_DEPTH_3_WITH_POLICIES = { | ||
| riskRuleRuleSets: { | ||
| include: { | ||
| riskRule: { | ||
| include: { | ||
| riskRulePolicy: true | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| parentRuleSets: { | ||
| include: { | ||
| parent: { | ||
| include: { | ||
| riskRuleRuleSets: { | ||
| include: { | ||
| riskRule: { | ||
| include: { | ||
| riskRulePolicy: true | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| parentRuleSets: { | ||
| include: { | ||
| parent: { | ||
| include: { | ||
| riskRuleRuleSets: { | ||
| include: { | ||
| riskRule: { | ||
| include: { | ||
| riskRulePolicy: true | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| parentRuleSets: { | ||
| include: { | ||
| parent: { | ||
| include: { | ||
| riskRuleRuleSets: { | ||
| include: { | ||
| riskRule: { | ||
| include: { | ||
| riskRulePolicy: true | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } satisfies Prisma.RuleSetInclude |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review the nesting depth for performance considerations.
The structure is deeply nested, which can impact query performance. Ensure that this depth is necessary for your use case and consider optimizing if possible.
| // async create(policyId: string, createRiskRuleSetData: Static<typeof CreateRiskRuleSchema>) { | ||
| // return this.riskRuleSetRepository.create(policyId, { | ||
| // ...createRiskRuleSetData, | ||
| // rules: { | ||
| // createMany: { | ||
| // data: createRiskRuleSetData.ruleSet.rules.map(rule => ({ | ||
| // operator: rule.operation, | ||
| // engine: rule.engine, | ||
| // comparisonValue: rule.value, | ||
| // key: rule.key, | ||
| // })), | ||
| // }, | ||
| // }, | ||
| // }); | ||
| // } | ||
| // | ||
| // async findOne(id: string, policyId: string) { | ||
| // const riskRuleSet = await this.riskRuleSetRepository.findById(id, policyId); | ||
| // | ||
| // return riskRuleSet; | ||
| // } | ||
| // | ||
| // async update( | ||
| // id: string, | ||
| // policyId: string, | ||
| // updateRiskRuleSetDto: Static<typeof CreateRiskRuleSchema>, | ||
| // ) { | ||
| // // TODO update to risk to update module | ||
| // const updatedRiskRuleSet = await this.riskRuleSetRepository.updateById( | ||
| // id, | ||
| // policyId, | ||
| // updateRiskRuleSetDto, | ||
| // ); | ||
| // | ||
| // if (!updatedRiskRuleSet) { | ||
| // throw new NotFoundException(`RiskRuleSet with ID "${id}" not found`); | ||
| // } | ||
| // | ||
| // return updatedRiskRuleSet; | ||
| // } | ||
| // | ||
| // async delete(id: string, policyId: string) { | ||
| // const result = await this.riskRuleSetRepository.deleteById(id, policyId); | ||
| // | ||
| // if (!result?.id) { | ||
| // throw new NotFoundException(`RiskRuleSet with ID "${id}" not found`); | ||
| // } | ||
| // } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Implement and test the commented-out methods.
The methods for creating, finding, updating, and deleting risk rule sets are commented out. Ensure these are implemented and tested thoroughly.
Do you want me to help implement these methods or open a GitHub issue to track this task?
| async findById(id: string, projectIds: TProjectIds) { | ||
| return await this.ruleSetRepository.findById(id, projectIds); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding error handling for not found cases.
The findById method does not handle cases where the rule set is not found. Consider using findFirstOrThrow or handling the null case explicitly.
async findById(id: string, projectIds: TProjectIds) {
const ruleSet = await this.ruleSetRepository.findById(id, projectIds);
if (!ruleSet) {
throw new NotFoundException(`Rule set with ID ${id} not found.`);
}
return ruleSet;
}| async createRuleSet( | ||
| { | ||
| ruleSetData, | ||
| parentRuleSetId, | ||
| projectId, | ||
| }: { | ||
| ruleSetData: Omit<Prisma.RuleSetUncheckedCreateInput, 'projectId' | 'isPublic'>; | ||
| parentRuleSetId?: string; | ||
| projectId: TProjectId; | ||
| }) { | ||
| const ruleSet = await this.ruleSetRepository.create( | ||
| { | ||
| createArgs: ruleSetData, | ||
| parentId: parentRuleSetId, | ||
| projectId, | ||
| } | ||
| ); | ||
|
|
||
| return ruleSet; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding input validation.
The createRuleSet method lacks validation for ruleSetData, parentRuleSetId, and projectId. Consider adding validation to ensure data integrity.
if (!projectId || !ruleSetData) {
throw new BadRequestException('Project ID and rule set data are required.');
}| async updateRuleSet( | ||
| { | ||
| ruleId, | ||
| ruleData, | ||
| projectId, | ||
| projectIds, | ||
| }: { | ||
| ruleId: string; | ||
| ruleData: Partial< | ||
| Omit<Prisma.RuleSetUncheckedCreateInput, 'projectId' | 'isPublic' | 'id'> | ||
| >; | ||
| projectId: TProjectId; | ||
| projectIds: TProjectIds; | ||
| }) { | ||
| const rule = await this.findById(ruleId, projectIds); | ||
|
|
||
| if (rule.isPublic) { | ||
| throw new BadRequestException('Cannot delete public rule'); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return await this.ruleSetRepository.updateById(ruleId, projectId, ruleData); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Correct the exception message.
The exception message in the updateRuleSet method is misleading. It should indicate that public rules cannot be updated, not deleted.
if (rule.isPublic) {
throw new BadRequestException('Cannot update public rule');
}| async createRule( | ||
| @common.Body() data: TCreatedRuleset, | ||
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | ||
| ) { | ||
| const {parentRuleSetId, ...rulesetCreationData} = data | ||
|
|
||
| return await this.ruleSetService.createRuleSet({ | ||
| ruleSetData: rulesetCreationData, | ||
| projectId: currentProjectId, | ||
| parentRuleSetId: parentRuleSetId, | ||
| }); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding error handling to createRule method.
The createRule method lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions. Consider wrapping the service call in a try-catch block.
+ try {
const {parentRuleSetId, ...rulesetCreationData} = data;
return await this.ruleSetService.createRuleSet({
ruleSetData: rulesetCreationData,
projectId: currentProjectId,
parentRuleSetId: parentRuleSetId,
});
+ } catch (error) {
+ // Handle error appropriately
+ throw new Error('Failed to create rule');
+ }Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| async createRule( | |
| @common.Body() data: TCreatedRuleset, | |
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | |
| ) { | |
| const {parentRuleSetId, ...rulesetCreationData} = data | |
| return await this.ruleSetService.createRuleSet({ | |
| ruleSetData: rulesetCreationData, | |
| projectId: currentProjectId, | |
| parentRuleSetId: parentRuleSetId, | |
| }); | |
| } | |
| async createRule( | |
| @common.Body() data: TCreatedRuleset, | |
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | |
| ) { | |
| try { | |
| const {parentRuleSetId, ...rulesetCreationData} = data; | |
| return await this.ruleSetService.createRuleSet({ | |
| ruleSetData: rulesetCreationData, | |
| projectId: currentProjectId, | |
| parentRuleSetId: parentRuleSetId, | |
| }); | |
| } catch (error) { | |
| // Handle error appropriately | |
| throw new Error('Failed to create rule'); | |
| } | |
| } |
| async deleteRule(@common.Query() ruleId: string, @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds) { | ||
| await this.ruleService.deleteRule({ ruleId, projectIds }); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding error handling to deleteRule method.
The deleteRule method lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions. Consider wrapping the service call in a try-catch block.
+ try {
await this.ruleService.deleteRule({ ruleId, projectIds });
+ } catch (error) {
+ // Handle error appropriately
+ throw new Error('Failed to delete rule');
+ }Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| async deleteRule(@common.Query() ruleId: string, @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds) { | |
| await this.ruleService.deleteRule({ ruleId, projectIds }); | |
| } | |
| async deleteRule(@common.Query() ruleId: string, @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds) { | |
| try { | |
| await this.ruleService.deleteRule({ ruleId, projectIds }); | |
| } catch (error) { | |
| // Handle error appropriately | |
| throw new Error('Failed to delete rule'); | |
| } | |
| } |
| async updateRule( | ||
| @common.Query() ruleId: string, | ||
| @common.Body() updateRuleSchema: TUpdateRule, | ||
| @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds, | ||
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | ||
| ) { | ||
| const rule = await this.ruleService.updateRule({ | ||
| ruleId, | ||
| ruleData: updateRuleSchema, | ||
| projectId: currentProjectId, | ||
| projectIds, | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| return rule as TUpdateRule; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding error handling to updateRule method.
The updateRule method lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions. Consider wrapping the service call in a try-catch block.
+ try {
const rule = await this.ruleService.updateRule({
ruleId,
ruleData: updateRuleSchema,
projectId: currentProjectId,
projectIds,
});
return rule as TUpdateRule;
+ } catch (error) {
+ // Handle error appropriately
+ throw new Error('Failed to update rule');
+ }Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| async updateRule( | |
| @common.Query() ruleId: string, | |
| @common.Body() updateRuleSchema: TUpdateRule, | |
| @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds, | |
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | |
| ) { | |
| const rule = await this.ruleService.updateRule({ | |
| ruleId, | |
| ruleData: updateRuleSchema, | |
| projectId: currentProjectId, | |
| projectIds, | |
| }); | |
| return rule as TUpdateRule; | |
| async updateRule( | |
| @common.Query() ruleId: string, | |
| @common.Body() updateRuleSchema: TUpdateRule, | |
| @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds, | |
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | |
| ) { | |
| try { | |
| const rule = await this.ruleService.updateRule({ | |
| ruleId, | |
| ruleData: updateRuleSchema, | |
| projectId: currentProjectId, | |
| projectIds, | |
| }); | |
| return rule as TUpdateRule; | |
| } catch (error) { | |
| // Handle error appropriately | |
| throw new Error('Failed to update rule'); | |
| } |
| async assignRuleToRuleset( | ||
| @common.Query() ruleId: string, | ||
| @common.Body() assignRuleDate: TAssignRule, | ||
| @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds, | ||
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | ||
| ) { | ||
| const rule = await this.ruleService.assignRuleToRuleset( | ||
| ruleId, | ||
| assignRuleDate.ruleSetId, | ||
| currentProjectId, | ||
| projectIds, | ||
| ); | ||
|
|
||
| return { | ||
| ruleId: rule.id, | ||
| ...assignRuleDate, | ||
| }; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding error handling to assignRuleToRuleset method.
The assignRuleToRuleset method lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions. Consider wrapping the service call in a try-catch block.
+ try {
const rule = await this.ruleService.assignRuleToRuleset(
ruleId,
assignRuleDate.ruleSetId,
currentProjectId,
projectIds,
);
return {
ruleId: rule.id,
...assignRuleDate,
};
+ } catch (error) {
+ // Handle error appropriately
+ throw new Error('Failed to assign rule to ruleset');
+ }Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| async assignRuleToRuleset( | |
| @common.Query() ruleId: string, | |
| @common.Body() assignRuleDate: TAssignRule, | |
| @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds, | |
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | |
| ) { | |
| const rule = await this.ruleService.assignRuleToRuleset( | |
| ruleId, | |
| assignRuleDate.ruleSetId, | |
| currentProjectId, | |
| projectIds, | |
| ); | |
| return { | |
| ruleId: rule.id, | |
| ...assignRuleDate, | |
| }; | |
| } | |
| async assignRuleToRuleset( | |
| @common.Query() ruleId: string, | |
| @common.Body() assignRuleDate: TAssignRule, | |
| @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds, | |
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | |
| ) { | |
| try { | |
| const rule = await this.ruleService.assignRuleToRuleset( | |
| ruleId, | |
| assignRuleDate.ruleSetId, | |
| currentProjectId, | |
| projectIds, | |
| ); | |
| return { | |
| ruleId: rule.id, | |
| ...assignRuleDate, | |
| }; | |
| } catch (error) { | |
| // Handle error appropriately | |
| throw new Error('Failed to assign rule to ruleset'); | |
| } | |
| } |
| async unassignRule( | ||
| @common.Query() ruleId: string, | ||
| @common.Body() unassignRule: TUnassignRule, | ||
| @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds, | ||
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | ||
| ) { | ||
| const rule = await this.ruleService.unassignRuleFromRuleset( | ||
| ruleId, | ||
| unassignRule.ruleSetId, | ||
| currentProjectId, | ||
| projectIds, | ||
| ); | ||
|
|
||
| return { | ||
| ruleId: rule.id, | ||
| ...unassignRule, | ||
| }; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding error handling to unassignRule method.
The unassignRule method lacks error handling, which could lead to unhandled exceptions. Consider wrapping the service call in a try-catch block.
+ try {
const rule = await this.ruleService.unassignRuleFromRuleset(
ruleId,
unassignRule.ruleSetId,
currentProjectId,
projectIds,
);
return {
ruleId: rule.id,
...unassignRule,
};
+ } catch (error) {
+ // Handle error appropriately
+ throw new Error('Failed to unassign rule from ruleset');
+ }Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| async unassignRule( | |
| @common.Query() ruleId: string, | |
| @common.Body() unassignRule: TUnassignRule, | |
| @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds, | |
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | |
| ) { | |
| const rule = await this.ruleService.unassignRuleFromRuleset( | |
| ruleId, | |
| unassignRule.ruleSetId, | |
| currentProjectId, | |
| projectIds, | |
| ); | |
| return { | |
| ruleId: rule.id, | |
| ...unassignRule, | |
| }; | |
| } | |
| async unassignRule( | |
| @common.Query() ruleId: string, | |
| @common.Body() unassignRule: TUnassignRule, | |
| @ProjectIds() projectIds: TProjectIds, | |
| @CurrentProject() currentProjectId: TProjectId, | |
| ) { | |
| try { | |
| const rule = await this.ruleService.unassignRuleFromRuleset( | |
| ruleId, | |
| unassignRule.ruleSetId, | |
| currentProjectId, | |
| projectIds, | |
| ); | |
| return { | |
| ruleId: rule.id, | |
| ...unassignRule, | |
| }; | |
| } catch (error) { | |
| // Handle error appropriately | |
| throw new Error('Failed to unassign rule from ruleset'); | |
| } | |
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
Outside diff range, codebase verification and nitpick comments (1)
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/schemas/create-risk-rule.schema.ts (1)
1-54: Ensure comprehensive validation inCreateRiskRuleSchema.The schema is well-defined, but consider adding additional constraints or custom validation logic if necessary to ensure data integrity.
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (29)
- services/workflows-service/prisma/data-migrations (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/consts/rule-set-depth-of-3-with-rules.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/consts/rule-set-parent-depth-3-with-policies.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/helpers/rule-set-search-and-flatten-values.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/json.json (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.controller.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.module.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.repository.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.service.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/schemas/create-risk-rule-policy-schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/schemas/update-risk-rule-policy-schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/risk-rule.controller.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/risk-rule.module.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/risk-rule.repository.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/risk-rule.service.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/schemas/connect-risk-rule-to-ruleset.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/schemas/copy-risk-rule.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/schemas/create-risk-rule.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/schemas/disconnect-risk-rule-to-ruleset.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/schemas/update-risk-rule.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/rule-set.controller.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/rule-set.repository.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/rule-set.service.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/schemas/create-rule-set.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/schemas/unassign-ruleset-from-parent.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.controller.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.repository.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.service.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/schemas/unassign-rule-from-rule-set.schema.ts (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (5)
- services/workflows-service/prisma/data-migrations
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/consts/rule-set-depth-of-3-with-rules.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/consts/rule-set-parent-depth-3-with-policies.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/schemas/create-rule-set.schema.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.controller.ts
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (10)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/helpers/rule-set-search-and-flatten-values.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/json.json
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/risk-rule.module.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/risk-rule.repository.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/risk-rule.service.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/rule-set.controller.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/rule-set.repository.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/rule-set.service.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.repository.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.service.ts
Additional comments not posted (32)
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/schemas/update-risk-rule.schema.ts (1)
1-6: LGTM! Verify theCreateRiskRuleSchemadefinition.The use of
Type.Partialis appropriate for creating an update schema. Ensure thatCreateRiskRuleSchemais correctly defined and comprehensive.Verification successful
CreateRiskRuleSchema is comprehensive and correctly defined.
The
CreateRiskRuleSchemaincludes both required and optional fields, making it suitable for use withType.PartialinUpdateRiskRuleSchema. The schema is well-structured and covers all necessary aspects for defining a risk rule.
- The schema includes fields such as
name,riskRulePolicyId,operator,domain,indicator,riskLevel,baseRiskScore,additionalRiskScore, and optional fields likeminRiskScore,maxRiskScore, andruleSetId.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the definition of `CreateRiskRuleSchema`. # Test: Search for the definition of `CreateRiskRuleSchema`. Expect: A valid schema definition. ast-grep --lang typescript --pattern 'const CreateRiskRuleSchema = $_'Length of output: 9662
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/schemas/unassign-rule-from-rule-set.schema.ts (1)
1-9: Schema definition looks good.The
UnassignRuleFromRuleSetSchemais well-defined with a clear description forruleSetId.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/schemas/unassign-ruleset-from-parent.schema.ts (1)
1-9: Schema definition looks good.The
UnassignRulesetFromParentSchemais well-defined with a clear description forparentRuleSetId.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/schemas/connect-risk-rule-to-ruleset.schema.ts (1)
1-9: Schema definition looks good.The schema for connecting a risk rule to a ruleset is well-defined with clear descriptions. The use of
Type.StringforruleSetIdis appropriate, and the type alias is correctly set up.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/schemas/create-risk-rule-policy-schema.ts (1)
1-10: Schema definition looks good.The schema for creating a risk rule policy is well-defined with clear descriptions and examples. The use of
Type.Stringfornameis appropriate, and the type alias is correctly set up.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/schemas/copy-risk-rule.schema.ts (1)
1-10: Schema definition looks good.The schema for copying a risk rule is well-defined with clear descriptions and examples. The use of
Type.StringfornewNameis appropriate, and the type alias is correctly set up.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/schemas/disconnect-risk-rule-to-ruleset.schema.ts (1)
1-9: Schema definition looks good.The schema is well-defined with a clear description for
ruleSetId. No issues found.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/schemas/update-risk-rule-policy-schema.ts (1)
1-12: Partial schema definition looks good.The use of
Type.Partialis appropriate for update operations, and the fieldnameis well-documented with a description and example. No issues found.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.module.ts (1)
1-13: Module definition looks good.The module is well-structured, importing necessary dependencies and correctly providing and exporting the service. No issues found.
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.service.ts (6)
10-12: Ensure input validation forcreateRiskRulePolicy.Consider validating the
dataobject before passing it to the repository to prevent invalid data from being persisted.
14-18: Consider handlingfindByIdnot found scenarios.Although
findFirstOrThrowwill throw an error if no policy is found, consider catching this error to provide a more user-friendly message or handle it appropriately.
20-22: Ensure query arguments are validated infindMany.Validate
argsandprojectIdsto ensure they contain valid data before querying the repository.
40-42: Consider handlingdeleteRiskRulePolicynot found scenarios.Ensure that a meaningful error message is returned if the policy to be deleted does not exist.
44-46: Ensure validation foraddRiskRuleToPolicy.Validate
policyId,riskRuleId, andprojectIdsto ensure they are correct before proceeding with the repository call.
24-38: Clarify public policy update restrictions inupdateRiskRulePolicy.The method prevents updates to public policies but doesn't log or notify why the update is restricted. Consider adding logging for such cases.
- throw new BadRequestException('Cannot add risk rule to public policy'); + throw new BadRequestException('Cannot update a public risk rule policy');Likely invalid or redundant comment.
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.repository.ts (4)
14-16: Consider adding validation increate.Ensure that the
dataobject is validated before attempting to create a new policy to prevent invalid data from being stored.
18-22: Ensure proper error handling infindById.The method uses
findFirstOrThrow, which throws an error if no policy is found. Consider catching this error to provide a more informative response.
24-28: Ensure query arguments are validated infindMany.Validate
argsandprojectIdsto ensure they contain valid data before querying the database.
46-50: Ensure proper error handling indelete.Ensure that a meaningful error message is returned if the policy to be deleted does not exist.
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.controller.ts (5)
23-42: LGTM!The
createRiskRulePolicymethod is well-implemented with appropriate validation and data handling.
44-57: LGTM!The
getRiskRulePolicymethod is correctly implemented with proper validation and service interaction.
59-65: LGTM!The
listRiskRulePoliciesmethod is well-implemented, efficiently retrieving policies with appropriate validation.
67-88: LGTM!The
updateRiskRulePolicymethod is correctly implemented with appropriate validation and data handling.
90-105: LGTM!The
deleteRiskRulePolicymethod is well-implemented, ensuring proper validation and service interaction for deletion.services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/risk-rule.controller.ts (8)
26-45: LGTM!The
createRiskRulemethod is well-implemented with appropriate validation and data handling.
48-61: LGTM!The
getRiskRulemethod is correctly implemented with proper validation and service interaction.
63-69: LGTM!The
listRiskRulesmethod is well-implemented, efficiently retrieving rules with appropriate validation.
71-91: LGTM!The
updateRiskRulemethod is correctly implemented with appropriate validation and data handling.
94-106: LGTM!The
deleteRiskRulemethod is well-implemented, ensuring proper validation and service interaction for deletion.
109-135: LGTM!The
copyRiskRulemethod is well-implemented with appropriate validation and data handling for copying rules.
137-157: LGTM!The
connectRiskRuleToRulesetmethod is well-implemented, ensuring proper validation and service interaction for connecting rules to rulesets.
160-180: LGTM!The
disconnectRiskRuleFromRulesetmethod is well-implemented, ensuring proper validation and service interaction for disconnecting rules from rulesets.
| Type.String({ | ||
| minimum: 0, | ||
| maximum: 100, | ||
| description: 'The ID of the ruleset to connect the risk rule to (optional)', | ||
| }), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Clarify ruleSetId constraints.
The ruleSetId field has minimum and maximum properties, which are typically used for numbers. Ensure these constraints are intended for a string field.
- Type.String({
- minimum: 0,
- maximum: 100,
- description: 'The ID of the ruleset to connect the risk rule to (optional)',
- }),
+ Type.String({
+ description: 'The ID of the ruleset to connect the risk rule to (optional)',
+ }),Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| Type.String({ | |
| minimum: 0, | |
| maximum: 100, | |
| description: 'The ID of the ruleset to connect the risk rule to (optional)', | |
| }), | |
| Type.String({ | |
| description: 'The ID of the ruleset to connect the risk rule to (optional)', | |
| }), |
| async addRiskRule( | ||
| policyId: string, | ||
| riskRuleId: string, | ||
| projectIds: TProjectIds, | ||
| ): Promise<RiskRulesPolicy> { | ||
| const policy = await this.findById(policyId, projectIds); | ||
| if (policy.isPublic) { | ||
| throw new BadRequestException('Cannot add risk rule to public policy'); | ||
| } | ||
| return this.prisma.riskRulesPolicy.update({ | ||
| where: { id: policyId }, | ||
| data: { | ||
| riskRule: { | ||
| connect: { id: riskRuleId }, | ||
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| }); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider validation and logging in addRiskRule.
Validate policyId, riskRuleId, and projectIds to ensure they are correct before proceeding with the repository call. Also, consider logging attempts to add rules to public policies.
- throw new BadRequestException('Cannot add risk rule to public policy');
+ throw new BadRequestException('Cannot add a risk rule to a public policy');Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
| async update( | ||
| id: string, | ||
| data: Prisma.RiskRulesPolicyUncheckedUpdateInput, | ||
| projectId: TProjectId, | ||
| ) { | ||
| const policy = await this.findById(id, [projectId]); | ||
| if (policy.isPublic) { | ||
| throw new BadRequestException('Cannot add risk rule to public policy'); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return this.prisma.riskRulesPolicy.update({ | ||
| where: { id }, | ||
| data: data, | ||
| }); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Clarify public policy update restrictions in update.
The method prevents updates to public policies but does not provide feedback on why the update is restricted. Consider adding logging or user feedback.
- throw new BadRequestException('Cannot add risk rule to public policy');
+ throw new BadRequestException('Cannot update a public risk rule policy');Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| async update( | |
| id: string, | |
| data: Prisma.RiskRulesPolicyUncheckedUpdateInput, | |
| projectId: TProjectId, | |
| ) { | |
| const policy = await this.findById(id, [projectId]); | |
| if (policy.isPublic) { | |
| throw new BadRequestException('Cannot add risk rule to public policy'); | |
| } | |
| return this.prisma.riskRulesPolicy.update({ | |
| where: { id }, | |
| data: data, | |
| }); | |
| } | |
| async update( | |
| id: string, | |
| data: Prisma.RiskRulesPolicyUncheckedUpdateInput, | |
| projectId: TProjectId, | |
| ) { | |
| const policy = await this.findById(id, [projectId]); | |
| if (policy.isPublic) { | |
| throw new BadRequestException('Cannot update a public risk rule policy'); | |
| } | |
| return this.prisma.riskRulesPolicy.update({ | |
| where: { id }, | |
| data: data, | |
| }); | |
| } |
* started mapping logic over rules * feat: added format risk rule with policy * feat: finished integration to stripe logic * feat: fixed recursive types and structure
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (23)
- packages/common/src/index.ts (1 hunks)
- packages/common/src/rule-engine/index.ts (1 hunks)
- packages/common/src/rule-engine/rules/types.ts (1 hunks)
- packages/common/src/rule-engine/types.ts (3 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/prisma/data-migrations (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/prisma/migrations/20240813104622_create_risk_policy_and_rules/migration.sql (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/prisma/schema.prisma (4 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/app.module.ts (2 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/helpers/rule-set-search-and-flatten-values.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.repository.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.service.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/risk-rule.service.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/rule-set.controller.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/rule-set.service.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.service.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/schemas/create-rule.schema.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/types/types.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/rule-engine/core/rule-engine.ts (3 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/rule-engine/risk-rule.service.intg.test.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/rule-engine/risk-rule.service.ts (3 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/rule-engine/rule-engine.module.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/rule-engine/rule-engine.service.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/workflow/workflow.service.ts (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (4)
- packages/common/src/index.ts
- packages/common/src/rule-engine/index.ts
- services/workflows-service/prisma/data-migrations
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/risk-rule.service.ts
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (8)
- services/workflows-service/prisma/schema.prisma
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/helpers/rule-set-search-and-flatten-values.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.repository.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.service.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/rule-set.controller.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/rule-set.service.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/rule.service.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule/schemas/create-rule.schema.ts
Additional comments not posted (27)
services/workflows-service/src/rule-engine/rule-engine.service.ts (1)
7-10: LGTM! Verify compatibility withRuleSetWithChildren.The change to accept
RuleSetWithChildrenenhances the flexibility of therunmethod. Ensure that theRuleEnginecan process this new type correctly without issues.Would you like me to help verify the compatibility of
RuleEnginewithRuleSetWithChildren?services/workflows-service/src/rule-engine/rule-engine.module.ts (1)
5-8: LGTM! Verify integration ofRiskRulePolicyModule.The addition of
RiskRulePolicyModuleto the imports enhances the module's capabilities. Ensure that it is correctly integrated and utilized within theRuleEngineModule.Would you like me to help verify the integration of
RiskRulePolicyModulewithin the module?packages/common/src/rule-engine/rules/types.ts (1)
13-17: LGTM! Verify usage ofRuleSetWithChildren.The introduction of
RuleSetWithChildrenallows for nested rule structures, enhancing the rule engine's expressiveness. Ensure that all parts of the system interacting with rule sets can handle this new structure.Would you like me to help verify the usage of
RuleSetWithChildrenacross the system?packages/common/src/rule-engine/types.ts (4)
28-31: LGTM!The
TNotionRulesOptionstype is correctly defined with appropriate properties.
33-36: LGTM!The
TDatabaseRulesOptionstype is correctly defined with appropriate properties.
38-38: LGTM! Verify the usage of the union type.The
TFindAllRulesOptionstype is effectively redefined as a union, improving clarity.Ensure that the union type is used correctly throughout the codebase.
Verification successful
Usage of
TFindAllRulesOptionsis Correct Across the CodebaseThe
TFindAllRulesOptionstype is used in several files, indicating that it is integrated into the codebase. Here are some locations where it appears:
packages/workflow-core/src/lib/plugins/common-plugin/types.ts: Used in type definitions forrulesSourceandruleOptions.services/workflows-service/src/workflow/workflow.service.ts: Used forruleStoreServiceOptions.services/workflows-service/src/rule-engine/risk-rule.service.ts: Appears in type definitions.These usages suggest that the union type is correctly applied in various parts of the codebase, ensuring flexibility and clarity.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of `TFindAllRulesOptions` type in the codebase. # Test: Search for the type usage. Expect: Correct usage of the union type. rg --type typescript 'TFindAllRulesOptions'Length of output: 78
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of `TFindAllRulesOptions` type in the codebase. # Test: Search for the type usage in TypeScript files. rg 'TFindAllRulesOptions' --glob '*.ts'Length of output: 1059
12-16: LGTM! Verify the type usage in the codebase.The
RuleSetWithChildrentype is well-defined for nested rule structures.Ensure that its usage is consistent and correct throughout the codebase.
Verification successful
Verification Successful: Consistent Usage of
RuleSetWithChildrenThe
RuleSetWithChildrentype is used consistently across the codebase to handle nested rule structures. Here are some key locations where it is utilized:
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.service.tsservices/workflows-service/src/rule-engine/rule-engine.service.tsservices/workflows-service/src/rule-engine/core/rule-engine.tsThese usages align with the intended design of the type. No issues were found.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of `RuleSetWithChildren` type in the codebase. # Test: Search for the type usage. Expect: Consistent and correct usage. rg --type typescript 'RuleSetWithChildren'Length of output: 77
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of `RuleSetWithChildren` type in the codebase. # Test: Search for the type usage. Expect: Consistent and correct usage. rg --type ts 'RuleSetWithChildren'Length of output: 2060
services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/types/types.ts (7)
11-13: LGTM!The
RiskRuleWithPolicytype is correctly defined, allowing for an optional policy association.
15-17: LGTM!The
RiskRuleRuleSetWithRuletype is correctly defined, enabling associations with risk rules and policies.
19-21: LGTM!The
RuleSetWithRiskRulestype is correctly defined, facilitating the linkage of rule sets with risk rules.
23-25: LGTM!The
RiskRuleWithRuleSettype is correctly defined, supporting the association of risk rules with rule sets.
27-30: LGTM!The
RuleSetWithChildrenAndRulestype is correctly defined, enabling complex nested structures.
32-34: LGTM!The
RulesetToRuleWithChildtype is correctly defined, supporting hierarchical relationships.
40-52: LGTM!The
RuleSetWithParenttype is correctly defined, enabling recursive parent-child relationships.services/workflows-service/src/rule-engine/risk-rule.service.intg.test.ts (1)
20-20: Verify the completeness of the test case withprojectIds.The addition of
projectIdsas an empty array in the test setup suggests an expansion of test coverage. Ensure that scenarios with non-emptyprojectIdsare also tested if applicable.Verification successful
Test coverage for
projectIdsis adequate.The test suite includes scenarios with non-empty
projectIds, ensuring that relevant cases are covered.
services/workflows-service/src/workflow/workflow.controller.internal.intg.test.tscontains a test withprojectIds: [project.id].Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage and testing of `projectIds` in the codebase. # Test: Search for other test cases involving `projectIds`. Expect: Comprehensive test coverage. rg --type typescript 'projectIds'Length of output: 68
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage and testing of `projectIds` in the codebase. # Test: Search for other test cases involving `projectIds`. Expect: Comprehensive test coverage. rg --type ts 'projectIds'Length of output: 81430
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Search for test cases that involve non-empty `projectIds`. # Test: Search for test cases with non-empty `projectIds` to ensure comprehensive test coverage. rg --type ts 'projectIds: \[.+\]' --glob '*test*.ts'Length of output: 170
services/workflows-service/src/rule-engine/core/rule-engine.ts (2)
14-16: Ensure type guard correctness.The
isRulesetWithChildrenfunction correctly checks for the presence of thechildRuleSetproperty. This is a simple and effective way to implement a type guard.
47-66: Verify recursive processing logic.The
runRuleSetfunction now supportsRuleSetWithChildren, allowing for recursive processing of nested rule sets. Ensure that this logic is thoroughly tested, especially with complex nested structures, to avoid stack overflow or performance issues.services/workflows-service/src/rule-engine/risk-rule.service.ts (3)
7-7: New service dependency added.The
RiskRulePolicyServiceis added as a dependency, which suggests expanded functionality. Ensure that the service is correctly configured and utilized.
46-54: Type definition updated to union type.The
TFindAllRulesOptionshas been updated to a union type, allowing for different sources. This change enhances flexibility but ensure that all branches are covered in logic and tests.
Line range hint
66-118: Enhanced filtering infindAllmethod.The
findAllmethod now supports filtering byprojectIdswhen the source is 'database'. Ensure that this logic is tested for different scenarios, including edge cases with empty or large lists of project IDs.services/workflows-service/src/app.module.ts (2)
50-54: New risk-related modules imported.The imports for
RiskRulePolicyModule,RuleModule,RiskRuleModule, andRuleSetModuleindicate expanded functionality. Ensure that these modules are correctly configured and integrated into the application.
133-137: Modules integrated into application.The new risk-related modules are integrated into the
AppModule. Verify that their configurations align with the application's overall architecture and dependencies.Verification successful
Modules are correctly imported and used in the application.
The modules
RiskRulePolicyModule,RiskRuleModule,RuleSetModule, andRuleModuleare correctly imported and integrated within the application. They are used in various parts of the codebase, indicating proper configuration and usage.
- The modules are declared as classes, confirming their existence.
- They are imported into other modules, such as
RuleEngineModule, indicating integration into the application's architecture.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify correct configuration and integration of new modules. # Test: Search for configurations of the new modules. Expect: Proper configuration and usage. rg --type typescript -A 5 $'RiskRulePolicyModule|RuleModule|RiskRuleModule|RuleSetModule'Length of output: 125
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify correct configuration and integration of new modules. # Find all TypeScript files and search for configurations of the new modules. fd --extension ts --exec rg -A 5 'RiskRulePolicyModule|RuleModule|RiskRuleModule|RuleSetModule'Length of output: 1285
services/workflows-service/prisma/migrations/20240813104622_create_risk_policy_and_rules/migration.sql (4)
1-8: Enums Creation Approved.The enums
IndicatorRiskLevel,RuleEngine, andRulesetOperatorare well-defined and cover necessary categories.
10-110: Tables Creation Approved.The tables are well-structured with appropriate primary keys and fields. The use of JSONB in the
Ruletable is suitable for flexible data storage.
112-152: Indexes Creation Approved.The indexes are appropriately placed to optimize query performance, especially for foreign keys and unique constraints.
154-185: Foreign Keys Creation Approved.The foreign key constraints are correctly defined to ensure referential integrity across related tables.
services/workflows-service/src/workflow/workflow.service.ts (1)
1967-1969: Method Signature Update Approved.The addition of
projectIdsandshouldThrowOnValidationenhances control over rule retrieval.Ensure that all calls to
findAllinriskRuleServiceare updated to match the new signature.
| export const RuleEngine = ( | ||
| ruleSets: RuleSet | RuleSetWithChildren, | ||
| helpers?: typeof OperationHelpers, | ||
| ) => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider dependency injection for helpers.
The RuleEngine function mentions a TODO for injecting helpers. Consider using dependency injection to manage helpers, which can improve testability and maintainability.
// Example: Inject helpers using a dependency injection framework or pattern.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (6)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.module.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.service.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/risk-rule.controller.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/risk-rule.module.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/rule-set.module.ts (1 hunks)
- services/workflows-service/src/rule-engine/core/rule-engine.ts (3 hunks)
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/rule-set/rule-set.module.ts
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (5)
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.module.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule-policy/risk-rule-policy.service.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/risk-rule.controller.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/risk-rules/risk-rule/risk-rule.module.ts
- services/workflows-service/src/rule-engine/core/rule-engine.ts
|
|
||
| model Rule { | ||
| id String @id @default(cuid()) | ||
| riskRuleSetId String |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we can use it, transiation alert, merching monitoring alert, transition rules,
| key String | ||
| operator String | ||
| comparisonValue Json |
BAL-2445
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
RiskRulePolicyandRiskRuleSetto manage database operations.RiskRulePolicyModule,RiskRuleSetModule, andRuleSetModulefor structuring risk rule services.Bug Fixes
RiskRulePluginto correctly assigndatabaseIdbased onrulesSource.Chores
Refactor
Documentation