fix(plan): add validation for metered entitlement template

[tothandras]

Summary by CodeRabbit

Release Notes

• New Features

  • Added validation to ensure metered entitlements are properly configured with required settings.

• Tests

  • Enhanced test coverage for new metered entitlement validation requirements.

[coderabbitai]

Caution

Review failed

The pull request is closed.

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: ff811c3f-e158-4c34-92c1-f8341ae4487b

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 0d75c55 and 7bbef2d.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)

• e2e/productcatalog_test.go
• openmeter/productcatalog/errors.go
• openmeter/productcatalog/ratecard.go
• openmeter/subscription/errors_test.go

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

This PR adds validation for metered entitlement templates to require issueAfterReset to be configured. It introduces a new validation error code and issue in the productcatalog module, implements the validation check in RateCardMeta, and updates both e2e and unit tests to reflect the new validation requirement.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Error Definition openmeter/productcatalog/errors.go	Introduces new validation error code entitlement_template_issue_after_reset_required and corresponding ErrEntitlementTemplateIssueAfterResetRequired issue with warning severity for metered entitlements missing issueAfterReset.
Validation Logic openmeter/productcatalog/ratecard.go	Adds validation check in RateCardMeta.Validate that appends the new error when a metered entitlement template has IssueAfterReset == nil.
Test Updates e2e/productcatalog_test.go, openmeter/subscription/errors_test.go	Updates test expectations to validate the new entitlement template validation issue across e2e and unit test scenarios.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes

Possibly related PRs

• Feature Validation #2736 — Modifies RateCardMeta.Validate with entitlement-related validation checks in the same function.
• refactor: validation error for plan add-on assignment #2842 — Unified validation errors into models.ValidationIssue, providing the foundational validation infrastructure this PR builds on.
• feat: add validation error to models #2838 — Introduces ValidationIssue constructs and utility functions that this PR leverages for the new validation error.

Suggested reviewers

• chrisgacsal
• turip
• GAlexIHU

✨ Finishing Touches

• 📝 Generate docstrings (stacked PR)
• 📝 Generate docstrings (commit on current branch)

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment
• Commit unit tests in branch fix/plan-entitlements-validation

📝 Coding Plan

• Generate coding plan for human review comments

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

Tip

You can make CodeRabbit's review stricter and more nitpicky using the `assertive` profile, if that's what you prefer.

Change the reviews.profile setting to assertive to make CodeRabbit's nitpick more issues in your PRs.