feat: add useAppObjects hook and record mutation hooks by Copilot · Pull Request #221 · objectstack-ai/objectos

Copilot · 2026-02-08T14:53:56Z

Completes the Phase 1 Foundation gaps: missing useAppObjects metadata hook and CRUD mutation hooks for records.

`use-metadata.ts` — `useAppObjects`

Resolves all ObjectDefinition entries for an app by name, with mock fallback
Uses Promise.allSettled for concurrent fetching

`use-records.ts` — Mutation hooks

useCreateRecord / useUpdateRecord / useDeleteRecord via @objectstack/client SDK
Each mutation invalidates the appropriate TanStack Query cache keys on success

const create = useCreateRecord({ objectName: 'lead' });
const update = useUpdateRecord({ objectName: 'lead', recordId: 'lead-001' });
const del = useDeleteRecord({ objectName: 'lead' });

create.mutate({ name: 'New Lead', email: 'new@example.com' });
update.mutate({ status: 'qualified' });
del.mutate('lead-001');

Tests

resolveFields() utility coverage (5 tests)
Hook export validation for metadata and record hooks (9 tests)
All 65 tests pass, 0 CodeQL alerts

💬 We'd love your input! Share your thoughts on Copilot coding agent in our 2 minute survey.

vercel · 2026-02-08T14:54:02Z

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
objectos	Error		Feb 8, 2026 3:02pm

…/delete) - Add useAppObjects hook to use-metadata.ts for fetching all object definitions belonging to an app - Add useCreateRecord, useUpdateRecord, useDeleteRecord mutation hooks to use-records.ts - Add tests for resolveFields utility, metadata hooks exports, and record hooks exports - All 65 tests pass, TypeScript type check passes Co-authored-by: hotlong <50353452+hotlong@users.noreply.github.com>

…Objects Co-authored-by: hotlong <50353452+hotlong@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot

Pull request overview

Adds missing frontend data hooks in apps/web to complete Phase 1 “foundation” gaps by exposing app-scoped object metadata (useAppObjects) and CRUD mutation hooks for records, plus basic test scaffolding.

Changes:

Added useCreateRecord, useUpdateRecord, and useDeleteRecord TanStack Query mutation hooks with cache invalidation.
Added useAppObjects(appId) metadata hook to resolve an app’s object definitions concurrently with mock fallback.
Added tests for resolveFields() and “hook export exists” validations.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 5 out of 5 changed files in this pull request and generated 4 comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
apps/web/src/hooks/use-records.ts	Adds record mutation hooks and query cache invalidation logic.
apps/web/src/hooks/use-metadata.ts	Adds `useAppObjects` to fetch all object definitions for an app.
apps/web/src/types/metadata.ts	Adds `resolveFields()` utility to normalize field definitions.
apps/web/src/tests/types/metadata.test.ts	Adds unit tests for `resolveFields()`.
apps/web/src/tests/hooks/use-records.test.ts	Adds export/type presence tests for record hooks.
apps/web/src/tests/hooks/use-metadata.test.ts	Adds export/type presence tests for metadata hooks.

Copilot · 2026-02-08T15:10:59Z

 /**
 * TanStack Query hooks for CRUD record operations.
 *
 * Uses the official @objectstack/client SDK to fetch from the server.
 * Falls back to mock data when the server is unreachable.
 */

-import { useQuery } from '@tanstack/react-query';
+import { useQuery, useMutation, useQueryClient } from '@tanstack/react-query';
 import type { RecordData, RecordListResponse } from '@/types/metadata';
 import { objectStackClient } from '@/lib/api';
 import { getMockRecords, getMockRecord } from '@/lib/mock-data';


The file header says record hooks "fall back to mock data when the server is unreachable", but the newly added mutation hooks (create/update/delete) do not have any mock fallback and will error if the backend is down. Please update the header comment to reflect the actual behavior, or implement a consistent fallback strategy for mutations if that’s intended.

Copilot · 2026-02-08T15:10:59Z

+      const settled = await Promise.allSettled(
+        objectNames.map((name) =>
+          objectStackClient.meta.getObject(name).then((r) =>
+            r ? (r as ObjectDefinition) : getMockObjectDefinition(name),
+          ).catch(() => getMockObjectDefinition(name)),
+        ),
+      );
+      return settled
+        .filter((r): r is PromiseFulfilledResult<ObjectDefinition | undefined> =>
+          r.status === 'fulfilled')
+        .map((r) => r.value)
+        .filter((v): v is ObjectDefinition => !!v);


useAppObjects wraps each per-object fetch with .catch(() => getMockObjectDefinition(name)), so none of the mapped promises should reject. Given that, Promise.allSettled(...) plus filtering status === 'fulfilled' is redundant and adds complexity; consider switching to Promise.all(...) (or remove the inner catch if you truly want allSettled semantics).

Suggested change

const settled = await Promise.allSettled(

objectNames.map((name) =>

objectStackClient.meta.getObject(name).then((r) =>

r ? (r as ObjectDefinition) : getMockObjectDefinition(name),

).catch(() => getMockObjectDefinition(name)),

),

);

return settled

.filter((r): r is PromiseFulfilledResult<ObjectDefinition | undefined> =>

r.status === 'fulfilled')

.map((r) => r.value)

.filter((v): v is ObjectDefinition => !!v);

const results = await Promise.all(

objectNames.map((name) =>

objectStackClient.meta

.getObject(name)

.then((r) => (r ? (r as ObjectDefinition) : getMockObjectDefinition(name)))

.catch(() => getMockObjectDefinition(name)),

),

);

return results.filter((v): v is ObjectDefinition => !!v);

Copilot · 2026-02-08T15:11:00Z

+export function useCreateRecord({ objectName }: UseCreateRecordOptions) {
+  const queryClient = useQueryClient();
+
+  return useMutation<RecordData, Error, Partial<RecordData>>({
+    mutationFn: async (data) => {
+      const result = await objectStackClient.data.create(objectName, data);
+      return (result?.record ?? data) as RecordData;
+    },
+    onSuccess: () => {
+      void queryClient.invalidateQueries({ queryKey: ['records', objectName] });
+    },
+  });
+}
+
+// ── Update record ───────────────────────────────────────────────
+
+interface UseUpdateRecordOptions {
+  objectName: string;
+  recordId: string;
+}
+
+export function useUpdateRecord({ objectName, recordId }: UseUpdateRecordOptions) {
+  const queryClient = useQueryClient();
+
+  return useMutation<RecordData, Error, Partial<RecordData>>({
+    mutationFn: async (data) => {
+      const result = await objectStackClient.data.update(objectName, recordId, data);
+      return (result?.record ?? data) as RecordData;
+    },
+    onSuccess: () => {
+      void queryClient.invalidateQueries({ queryKey: ['records', objectName] });
+      void queryClient.invalidateQueries({ queryKey: ['record', objectName, recordId] });
+    },
+  });


The new mutation hooks add important cache-invalidation behavior (invalidate list queries; invalidate/remove detail queries), but the current tests only validate that the hooks are exported. Please add at least one behavioral test that asserts the expected query cache interactions (e.g., using a QueryClient wrapper + a mocked objectStackClient.data.* method) so regressions in query keys/invalidation are caught.

Copilot · 2026-02-08T15:11:00Z

+export function useAppObjects(appId: string | undefined) {
+  const appQuery = useAppDefinition(appId);
+
+  return useQuery<ObjectDefinition[]>({
+    queryKey: ['metadata', 'appObjects', appId],
+    queryFn: async () => {
+      const objectNames = appQuery.data?.objects ?? [];
+      const settled = await Promise.allSettled(
+        objectNames.map((name) =>
+          objectStackClient.meta.getObject(name).then((r) =>
+            r ? (r as ObjectDefinition) : getMockObjectDefinition(name),
+          ).catch(() => getMockObjectDefinition(name)),
+        ),
+      );
+      return settled
+        .filter((r): r is PromiseFulfilledResult<ObjectDefinition | undefined> =>
+          r.status === 'fulfilled')
+        .map((r) => r.value)
+        .filter((v): v is ObjectDefinition => !!v);
+    },
+    enabled: !!appId && !!appQuery.data,
+  });


useAppObjects contains non-trivial behavior (dependency on useAppDefinition, concurrent fetch with fallback-to-mock per object, and a specific queryKey). Current tests only validate that the hook is exported; please add a behavioral test that validates the resolution/fallback logic (e.g., when one object fetch rejects, the hook still returns mock for that object).

Initial plan

20e7720

Copilot AI assigned Copilot and hotlong Feb 8, 2026

Copilot started work on behalf of hotlong February 8, 2026 14:54 View session

vercel Bot had a problem deploying to Preview February 8, 2026 14:54 Failure

Copilot AI and others added 2 commits February 8, 2026 14:59

perf: use Promise.allSettled for concurrent object fetching in useApp…

6bd1f04

…Objects Co-authored-by: hotlong <50353452+hotlong@users.noreply.github.com>

vercel Bot had a problem deploying to Preview February 8, 2026 15:01 Failure

Copilot AI changed the title ~~[WIP] Build core infrastructure for metadata-driven business apps~~ feat: add useAppObjects hook and record mutation hooks Feb 8, 2026

Copilot AI requested a review from hotlong February 8, 2026 15:02

Copilot finished work on behalf of hotlong February 8, 2026 15:02

hotlong marked this pull request as ready for review February 8, 2026 15:08

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings February 8, 2026 15:08

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of hotlong February 8, 2026 15:08 View session

hotlong merged commit 8809a5e into main Feb 8, 2026
5 of 6 checks passed

Copilot AI reviewed Feb 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

feat: add useAppObjects hook and record mutation hooks#221

feat: add useAppObjects hook and record mutation hooks#221
hotlong merged 3 commits intomainfrom
copilot/build-core-infrastructure

Copilot AI commented Feb 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

vercel Bot commented Feb 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 8, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 8, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 8, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 8, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

Conversation

Copilot AI commented Feb 8, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

use-metadata.ts — useAppObjects

use-records.ts — Mutation hooks

Tests

Uh oh!

vercel Bot commented Feb 8, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 8, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 8, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 8, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 8, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

Copilot AI commented Feb 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

`use-metadata.ts` — `useAppObjects`

`use-records.ts` — Mutation hooks

vercel Bot commented Feb 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading