You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.
This PR includes no changesets
When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types
Tasks are run on every commit but only new migration files are pushed.
Close and reopen this PR if you want to apply changes from existing seed or migration files.
The schema changes present a modification to a TypeScript file that appears to be related to generating review prompts based on database documentation and schema changes. Here is a detailed review of the changes made:
Integration of Database Access: The addition of import { prisma } from '@liam-hq/db' indicates that the code is now utilizing Prisma, an ORM (Object-Relational Mapping) tool, to interact with the database. This is a positive change as it allows for more robust and type-safe interactions with the database, leading to potential improvements in code maintainability and readability.
Fetching Document Content: The code now includes a new asynchronous function that retrieves documents from the database based on a projectId provided in the payload. This is done through await prisma.doc.findMany({...}), which is a good practice for fetching multiple records efficiently. It also ensures that only relevant documents are fetched, which is crucial for context-specific operations like generating reviews.
Selective Document Retrieval: The query specifies a select clause with title and content, which is beneficial as it limits the data retrieved to only what is necessary for the review generation. This reduces data overhead and improves performance, which is especially important when dealing with larger datasets.
Document Formatting: The mapping of the retrieved documents into a formatted string (docsContent) is well-structured. This allows for easy integration of document content into the review template. Using template literals for formatting enhances readability and maintainability of the code, making it easier to modify in the future if needed.
Integration into the Review Generation Process: The docsContent is correctly integrated into the prompt generation process. By passing it to the invoke method along with schemaFiles and schemaChanges, the system is set to provide a more context-aware review. This is a significant enhancement, as it allows the review generation to be informed by prior documentation, leading to richer and more relevant feedback.
Error Handling: One area that could be improved is the error handling in the new asynchronous function. Currently, there is no try-catch block around the database query. Implementing error handling would ensure that if the database access fails (e.g., due to network issues or incorrect query), the application can manage the error gracefully and provide useful feedback.
Potential Performance Considerations: Depending on the number of documents retrieved, there may be performance implications. If many documents are associated with a project, fetching all of them could lead to performance bottlenecks. Consider implementing pagination or limiting the number of documents fetched if that becomes an issue.
Documentation and Code Comments: As this code is likely to be part of a larger application, it would be beneficial to include comments explaining the purpose of these changes, especially for future developers who may work on this code. Clear documentation enhances collaboration and understanding of the codebase.
Testing: It is crucial to ensure that these changes are accompanied by adequate unit tests and integration tests. Testing should cover scenarios such as successful document retrieval, handling of empty results, and ensuring that the formatting of docsContent is as expected. This will help maintain the reliability of the application after these modifications.
In conclusion, the schema changes reflect a thoughtful integration of database functionality into the review generation process, significantly enhancing the contextuality of the reviews produced. With slight enhancements in error handling, performance considerations, and documentation, this modification could greatly improve the robustness and maintainability of the application.
The code fetches docs from the database but doesn't handle the case where no docs are found. Consider adding a fallback message or default value when no documentation exists.
Fetching all docs for a project without pagination or filtering could lead to performance issues if there are many documents. Consider limiting the query or implementing pagination.
Add input validation for the project ID before using it in database queries to prevent unexpected behavior
The code retrieves documents from the database using payload.projectId without validating that the project ID exists or is in a valid format. This could lead to unexpected behavior if the project ID is invalid or doesn't exist. Add validation for the project ID before using it in the database query.
+// Validate project ID before using it+if (!payload.projectId || typeof payload.projectId !== 'string') {+ throw new Error('Invalid or missing project ID');+}+
const docs = await prisma.doc.findMany({
where: {
projectId: payload.projectId,
},
select: {
title: true,
content: true,
},
})
Apply this suggestion
Suggestion importance[1-10]: 6
Low
General
Handle empty documentation case
Add error handling for the case when no documentation is found for the project. Currently, if no docs are found, docsContent will be an empty string which might affect the review quality.
Why: The suggestion adds a useful log message when no documentation is found for a project, which improves debugging capabilities. While this is a valid improvement for error visibility, it doesn't critically impact functionality since the code would continue to work with an empty docsContent string.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
FunamaYukina
requested review from
MH4GF,
NoritakaIkeda,
hoshinotsuyoshi,
junkisai and
sasamuku
and removed request for
a team
“Table names must begin with ‘pj-’.” Add the following content to the Docs.
https://supabase.com/dashboard/project/cjrageakplnxcojvdguj/editor/29226?schema=public
A review was generated in the local environment, taking that Doc into account
https://supabase.com/dashboard/project/cjrageakplnxcojvdguj/editor/29170?schema=public
Issue
Why is this change needed?
What would you like reviewers to focus on?
Testing Verification
What was done
🤖 Generated by PR Agent at 0f4b1fa
Detailed Changes
processGenerateReview.ts
Include documentation context in review generationfrontend/apps/app/src/functions/processGenerateReview.ts
pipeline.
Additional Notes