docs: add per-metadata-type guide pages for application development by Copilot · Pull Request #630 · objectstack-ai/objectstack

Copilot · 2026-02-12T01:38:42Z

The docs site lacked dedicated pages explaining each metadata type used in metadata-driven application development. All metadata concepts were either scattered across reference docs or bundled into the data-modeling guide.

Changes

New guides/metadata/ section with 11 pages covering every metadata type a developer uses to build an application:
- Data layer: Object, Field, Validation
- UI layer: View (list + form), Page, App, Dashboard
- Automation layer: Flow, Workflow
- Security layer: Permission
index.mdx — overview with category table, architecture diagram, and quick-start example
Each page documents: schema properties, configuration options, type-specific variants, naming conventions, and complete examples
Updated guides/meta.json and guides/index.mdx to wire up navigation

Structure

content/docs/guides/metadata/
├── meta.json        # nav config
├── index.mdx        # overview + architecture
├── object.mdx       # entities, capabilities, enterprise features
├── field.mdx        # 40+ field types, constraints, factories
├── view.mdx         # grid/kanban/calendar/gantt + form views
├── page.mdx         # component-based custom pages
├── app.mdx          # navigation, branding, access control
├── dashboard.mdx    # chart widgets, date ranges, global filters
├── flow.mdx         # visual automation, 15 node types
├── workflow.mdx     # event triggers, 7 action types, time triggers
├── validation.mdx   # 9 validation types, priorities
└── permission.mdx   # CRUD, field security, tab visibility, RLS

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

vercel · 2026-02-12T01:38:48Z

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

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
objectstack-play	Error		Feb 12, 2026 2:46am
spec	Error		Feb 12, 2026 2:46am

Create comprehensive documentation pages for each metadata type: - Object, Field, View, Page, App, Dashboard, Flow, Workflow, Validation, Permission Each page covers properties, configuration, and examples. Co-authored-by: hotlong <50353452+hotlong@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot

Pull request overview

Adds a new “Metadata Types” guide section to the docs site, aiming to give developers dedicated, per-metadata-type pages for metadata-driven application development.

Changes:

Introduces content/docs/guides/metadata/ with overview + individual guide pages (Object, Field, View, Page, App, Dashboard, Flow, Workflow, Validation, Permission).
Adds navigation wiring via content/docs/guides/meta.json and content/docs/guides/metadata/meta.json.
Updates content/docs/guides/index.mdx to include the new Metadata Types entry in the Guides landing page.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 14 out of 14 changed files in this pull request and generated 25 comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
content/docs/guides/metadata/index.mdx	New overview page + metadata category tables and file conventions
content/docs/guides/metadata/meta.json	Sidebar/nav configuration for metadata guide pages
content/docs/guides/metadata/object.mdx	New Object metadata guide page
content/docs/guides/metadata/field.mdx	New Field metadata guide page
content/docs/guides/metadata/view.mdx	New View (list/form) metadata guide page
content/docs/guides/metadata/page.mdx	New Page metadata guide page
content/docs/guides/metadata/app.mdx	New App metadata guide page
content/docs/guides/metadata/dashboard.mdx	New Dashboard metadata guide page
content/docs/guides/metadata/flow.mdx	New Flow metadata guide page
content/docs/guides/metadata/workflow.mdx	New Workflow metadata guide page
content/docs/guides/metadata/validation.mdx	New Validation metadata guide page
content/docs/guides/metadata/permission.mdx	New Permission metadata guide page
content/docs/guides/meta.json	Adds `metadata` into Guides navigation order
content/docs/guides/index.mdx	Adds “Metadata Types” link in Guides structure list

Copilot · 2026-02-12T02:33:04Z

+| `type` | `string` | ✅ | Component type or custom component name |
+| `id` | `string` | ✅ | Unique component identifier |
+| `label` | `string` | optional | Display label |
+| `properties` | `Record<string, any>` | optional | Component-specific configuration |


In PageComponentSchema, properties is required (it isn’t optional). The docs mark it optional and some examples omit it, which would fail schema validation. Either make properties required in docs/examples or explicitly show an empty object when no props are needed.

Suggested change

| `properties` | `Record<string, any>` | optional | Component-specific configuration |

| `properties` | `Record<string, any>` | ✅ | Component-specific configuration (use `{}` when no properties are needed) |

Copilot · 2026-02-12T02:33:05Z

+    account: {
+      annual_revenue: { readable: true, editable: false },
+      internal_notes: { readable: false, editable: false },
+    },
+  },
+
+  tabPermissions: {


In the spec, PermissionSetSchema.fields is a flat record keyed by "object.field" (e.g. { 'account.annual_revenue': { readable: true } }), not a nested { account: { annual_revenue: ... } } map. Update the examples and the fields type description to match the schema so configs validate.

Suggested change

account: {

annual_revenue: { readable: true, editable: false },

internal_notes: { readable: false, editable: false },

},

},

tabPermissions: {

'account.annual_revenue': { readable: true, editable: false },

'account.internal_notes': { readable: false, editable: false },

},

tabPermissions: {

tabPermissions: {

Copilot · 2026-02-12T02:33:05Z

+  {
+    name: 'own_records_only',
+    object: 'opportunity',
+    condition: "owner = {$currentUser.id}",
+  },
+  {


Row-level security policies in the spec use the canonical RLS schema (operation plus using/check expressions). The docs use { condition: ... } without an operation, which doesn’t match RowLevelSecurityPolicySchema. Update the example to use operation and using (and reference current_user.* variables).

Copilot · 2026-02-12T02:33:05Z

+```typescript
+globalFilters: [
+  { field: 'region', label: 'Region', type: 'select' },
+  { field: 'owner', label: 'Sales Rep', type: 'lookup' },
+]
+```


DashboardSchema.globalFilters[].type in the spec is text | select | date | number. The docs use type: 'lookup' in the examples, which won’t validate. Update the examples (or the schema reference) to reflect the supported enum values.

Copilot · 2026-02-12T02:33:05Z

+  { field: 'status', label: 'Active', operator: 'eq', value: 'active' },
+  { field: 'status', label: 'Closed', operator: 'eq', value: 'closed' },
+  { field: 'owner', label: 'My Records', operator: 'eq', value: '{currentUser}' },


Quick filter operators in the spec are equals, not_equals, contains, in, etc. The examples use eq, which won’t validate. Update the operator values in the examples and any referenced operator list.

Suggested change

{ field: 'status', label: 'Active', operator: 'eq', value: 'active' },

{ field: 'status', label: 'Closed', operator: 'eq', value: 'closed' },

{ field: 'owner', label: 'My Records', operator: 'eq', value: '{currentUser}' },

{ field: 'status', label: 'Active', operator: 'equals', value: 'active' },

{ field: 'status', label: 'Closed', operator: 'equals', value: 'closed' },

{ field: 'owner', label: 'My Records', operator: 'equals', value: '{currentUser}' },

Copilot · 2026-02-12T02:33:09Z

+| `rowActions` | `array` | optional | Per-row action buttons |
+| `bulkActions` | `array` | optional | Bulk selection actions |
+| `inlineEdit` | `boolean` | optional | Enable inline editing |
+| `exportOptions` | `object` | optional | Export configuration |


Copilot · 2026-02-12T02:33:10Z

+    {
+      type: 'field_update',
+      field: 'closed_date',
+      value: 'TODAY()',
+    },
+    {
+      type: 'email_alert',
+      template: 'deal_won_notification',
+      recipients: ['{record.owner.email}', 'sales-team@company.com'],
+    },
+    {


Workflow action objects require a name field per WorkflowActionSchema, but the examples omit it (and this pattern repeats in later action/timeTrigger examples). Add name to each action and document it in the action property tables so examples validate against the spec.

Suggested change

{

type: 'field_update',

field: 'closed_date',

value: 'TODAY()',

},

{

type: 'email_alert',

template: 'deal_won_notification',

recipients: ['{record.owner.email}', 'sales-team@company.com'],

},

{

{

name: 'closed_date_update',

type: 'field_update',

field: 'closed_date',

value: 'TODAY()',

},

{

name: 'deal_won_email_alert',

type: 'email_alert',

template: 'deal_won_notification',

recipients: ['{record.owner.email}', 'sales-team@company.com'],

},

{

name: 'customer_onboarding_task',

Copilot · 2026-02-12T02:33:10Z

+| `sortable` | `boolean` | Allow column sorting |
+| `resizable` | `boolean` | Allow column resize |
+| `summary` | `object` | Footer aggregation (`count`, `sum`, `avg`, `min`, `max`) |
+| `link` | `string` | Make cell a clickable link |


Copilot · 2026-02-12T02:33:10Z

+```typescript
+{
+  name: 'config_schema',
+  type: 'json',


This JSON schema validation example uses type: 'json', but the spec discriminator is type: 'json_schema' (JSONValidationSchema). Update the discriminator so the example validates against the current protocol.

Suggested change

type: 'json',

type: 'json_schema',

Copilot · 2026-02-12T02:33:10Z

+brand_color: Field.color({ label: 'Color', colorFormat: 'hex' }),
+satisfaction: Field.rating({ label: 'Rating', maxRating: 5 }),
+approval_signature: Field.signature({ label: 'Signature' }),
+embedding: Field.vector({ label: 'Embedding', vectorConfig: { dimensions: 1536 } }),
+```


Field.rating and Field.vector factory signatures in @objectstack/spec/data don’t match these examples (rating takes maxRating as the first arg; vector takes dimensions as the first arg). Update the examples to use the actual factory call patterns (or show raw { type: 'rating' | 'vector', ... } objects consistently).

Initial plan

1fb8422

Copilot AI assigned Copilot and hotlong Feb 12, 2026

Copilot started work on behalf of hotlong February 12, 2026 01:38 View session

Copilot AI changed the title ~~[WIP] Update official documentation for metadata application categories~~ docs: add per-metadata-type guide pages for application development Feb 12, 2026

Copilot AI requested a review from hotlong February 12, 2026 01:53

Copilot finished work on behalf of hotlong February 12, 2026 01:53

hotlong approved these changes Feb 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

hotlong marked this pull request as ready for review February 12, 2026 02:22

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings February 12, 2026 02:22

hotlong merged commit ac98523 into main Feb 12, 2026
1 of 3 checks passed

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of hotlong February 12, 2026 02:22 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Feb 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

vercel Bot had a problem deploying to Preview – spec February 12, 2026 02:45 Failure

vercel Bot had a problem deploying to Preview – objectstack-play February 12, 2026 02:46 Failure

	\| `properties` \| `Record<string, any>` \| optional \| Component-specific configuration \|
	\| `properties` \| `Record<string, any>` \| ✅ \| Component-specific configuration (use `{}` when no properties are needed) \|

	\| `exportOptions` \| `object` \| optional \| Export configuration \|
	\| `exportOptions` \| `string[]` \| optional \| Allowed export formats (e.g. `['csv', 'xlsx']`) \|

	\| `link` \| `string` \| Make cell a clickable link \|
	\| `link` \| `boolean` \| When `true`, render cell as a clickable link \|
	\| `action` \| `string` \| Optional action identifier to trigger when the link is clicked \|

Uh oh!

Conversation

Copilot AI commented Feb 12, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Changes

Structure

Uh oh!

vercel Bot commented Feb 12, 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 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

Copilot AI commented Feb 12, 2026 •

edited

Loading

vercel Bot commented Feb 12, 2026 •

edited

Loading