Gainsight NXT new components #14453
Gainsight NXT new components #14453
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎ 3 Skipped Deployments
|
WalkthroughThis pull request introduces multiple modules for the Gainsight NXT application, enabling the creation and updating of company, custom object, and person records. Each module defines an action with relevant properties and an asynchronous Changes
Assessment against linked issues
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Poem
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
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 using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
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: 9
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (6)
components/gainsight_nxt/actions/create-or-update-custom-object/create-or-update-custom-object.mjs (2)
3-8: Consider enhancing component metadata.
- Consider starting with version "1.0.0" since this is a new, complete component implementation.
- The description could be more explicit about the update-then-create behavior to set proper expectations.
- version: "0.0.1", + version: "1.0.0", - description: "Create or update a custom object record. [See the documentation](https://support.gainsight.com/gainsight_nxt/API_and_Developer_Docs/Custom_Object_API/Gainsight_Custom_Object_API_Documentation#Insert_API)", + description: "Creates or updates a custom object record. First attempts to update using provided key field(s); if no matching record exists, creates a new one. [See the documentation](https://support.gainsight.com/gainsight_nxt/API_and_Developer_Docs/Custom_Object_API/Gainsight_Custom_Object_API_Documentation#Insert_API)",
28-67: Consider implementing additional safeguards and monitoring.For production reliability, consider implementing:
- Rate limiting or throttling mechanism to prevent API abuse
- Structured logging for better debugging and monitoring
- Schema validation for the fieldValues object to catch data issues early
Would you like assistance in implementing any of these improvements?
components/gainsight_nxt/actions/create-or-update-company/create-or-update-company.mjs (1)
1-145: Consider architectural improvements for maintainability and security.As this component handles sensitive business data and is part of a larger integration:
- Consider extracting common validation logic into shared utilities for reuse across company, person, and custom object components
- Add logging for audit trail of data modifications
- Consider implementing rate limiting to prevent API abuse
Would you like assistance in implementing these architectural improvements?
components/gainsight_nxt/gainsight_nxt.app.mjs (3)
36-38: Consider removing or configuring the hardcodedaccept-languageheaderThe
accept-languageheader is hardcoded to specific language preferences. Unless required, it might be better to remove it or make it configurable to accommodate different users' locales.You can modify the headers as follows:
headers: { "content-type": "application/json", "accept": "application/json, text/plain, */*", - "accept-language": "en-GB,en-US;q=0.9,en;q=0.8", "accesskey": `${this.$auth.access_key}`, ...headers, },
68-72: Handle potential errors inlistCustomObjectsIf the API call fails in
listCustomObjects, the method may return undefined or throw an error. Consider adding error handling or returning a default value to prevent issues downstream.
27-27: Review the use of default parameter$ = thisIn the
_makeRequestmethod, the default parameter$ = thismight lead to confusion or unintended behavior. Ensure that this is necessary and won't conflict with the context where_makeRequestis called.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
pnpm-lock.yamlis excluded by!**/pnpm-lock.yaml
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
- components/gainsight_nxt/actions/create-or-update-company/create-or-update-company.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/gainsight_nxt/actions/create-or-update-custom-object/create-or-update-custom-object.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/gainsight_nxt/actions/create-or-update-person/create-or-update-person.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/gainsight_nxt/gainsight_nxt.app.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/gainsight_nxt/package.json (2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (10)
components/gainsight_nxt/package.json (3)
3-3: Version bump follows semver correctly.The version increment from 0.0.1 to 0.1.0 appropriately reflects the addition of new features (Gainsight NXT components) while maintaining backward compatibility.
14-14: LGTM: JSON formatting fix.The proper closing brace improves the JSON structure.
15-17: Dependencies section is properly configured.The @pipedream/platform dependency is correctly specified with a caret range (^3.0.3), allowing for compatible updates while preventing breaking changes.
Let's verify this is the latest compatible version:
✅ Verification successful
Based on the search results, I can see that @pipedream/platform versions range from ^0.9.0 to ^3.0.3 across different components. The gainsight_nxt component is using version ^3.0.3, which is the latest version being used across the codebase.
The dependency version is up-to-date.
The @pipedream/platform dependency in gainsight_nxt is using version ^3.0.3, which matches the latest version being used across other recently updated components in the codebase. No update is needed.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check if there's a newer compatible version of @pipedream/platform # that we should consider using # Search for other components using @pipedream/platform to compare versions rg -g "package.json" '"@pipedream/platform":\s*"\^[0-9]+\.[0-9]+\.[0-9]+"' components/Length of output: 89239
components/gainsight_nxt/actions/create-or-update-person/create-or-update-person.mjs (2)
1-8: LGTM! Well-structured metadata with documentation.The action metadata is well-defined with appropriate versioning and includes helpful documentation links.
1-1: Verify integration with gainsight_nxt.app.mjs.Let's confirm the imported app module provides the required functionality.
components/gainsight_nxt/actions/create-or-update-company/create-or-update-company.mjs (1)
1-8: LGTM! Component metadata follows Pipedream best practices.The component is well-structured with appropriate naming, versioning, and documentation links.
components/gainsight_nxt/gainsight_nxt.app.mjs (4)
39-39: Verify the inclusion of the access key in headersIncluding the
accesskeydirectly fromthis.$auth.access_keyin the request headers may expose sensitive information. Please confirm that this is the recommended method for authentication with the Gainsight NXT API.If not, consider using a more secure authentication approach as per the API documentation.
23-25: Ensure the base URL is correctly formattedVerify that
this.$auth.customer_domainincludes the protocol (e.g.,https://). If not, the constructed URL may be incorrect. Consider adding the protocol if it's missing.Adjust the
_baseUrlmethod if necessary:_baseUrl() { - return `${this.$auth.customer_domain}/v1`; + return `https://${this.$auth.customer_domain}/v1`; },
73-84: ValidateobjectNameto prevent injection attacksWhen using
objectNamein the URL path, ensure it is properly validated to prevent potential injection vulnerabilities. SinceobjectNamemay come from user input, adding validation enhances security.[security]
You can add validation like this:
async updateCustomObject({ objectName, ...args }) { + if (!/^[a-zA-Z0-9_-]+$/.test(objectName)) { + throw new Error("Invalid objectName parameter."); + } return this._makeRequest({ path: `/data/objects/${objectName}`, method: "PUT", ...args, }); },Apply similar validation in
createCustomObject.
61-67: Confirm the HTTP method forcreateOrUpdatePersonVerify that using the
PUTmethod with the/peoplemgmt/v1.0/peopleendpoint is appropriate for both creating and updating a person. If the API differentiates between creation and updates, you might need to handle them separately.
...ents/gainsight_nxt/actions/create-or-update-custom-object/create-or-update-custom-object.mjs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...ents/gainsight_nxt/actions/create-or-update-custom-object/create-or-update-custom-object.mjs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
components/gainsight_nxt/actions/create-or-update-person/create-or-update-person.mjs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
components/gainsight_nxt/actions/create-or-update-person/create-or-update-person.mjs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
components/gainsight_nxt/actions/create-or-update-company/create-or-update-company.mjs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
components/gainsight_nxt/actions/create-or-update-company/create-or-update-company.mjs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| description: "The name of the custom object.", | ||
| async options() { | ||
| const { data } = await this.listCustomObjects(); | ||
| return data/*?.filter?.((obj) => obj.objectType === "CUSTOM")*/.map(( { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Uncomment the filter to retrieve only custom objects
In the options method for objectName, the filter to select only custom objects is commented out. If you intend to display only custom objects in the options, please uncomment the filter.
Apply this diff to fix the issue:
- return data/*?.filter?.((obj) => obj.objectType === "CUSTOM")*/.map(( {
+ return data?.filter?.((obj) => obj.objectType === "CUSTOM")?.map(( {📝 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.
| return data/*?.filter?.((obj) => obj.objectType === "CUSTOM")*/.map(( { | |
| return data?.filter?.((obj) => obj.objectType === "CUSTOM")?.map(( { |
| }, | ||
| arr: { | ||
| type: "string", | ||
| label: "Anual Recurring Revenue (ARR)", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree with coderabbit, this looks like a typo.
| label: "Anual Recurring Revenue (ARR)", | |
| label: "Annual Recurring Revenue (ARR)", |
| originalContractDate: { | ||
| type: "string", | ||
| label: "Original Contract Date", | ||
| description: "The date the engagement with the client started.", | ||
| optional: true, | ||
| }, | ||
| renewalDate: { | ||
| type: "string", | ||
| label: "Renewal Date", | ||
| description: "The upcoming renewal date of the contract.", | ||
| optional: true, | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Agree with coderabbit. The date props should include the date format in the description.
| originalContractDate: { | |
| type: "string", | |
| label: "Original Contract Date", | |
| description: "The date the engagement with the client started.", | |
| optional: true, | |
| }, | |
| renewalDate: { | |
| type: "string", | |
| label: "Renewal Date", | |
| description: "The upcoming renewal date of the contract.", | |
| optional: true, | |
| }, | |
| originalContractDate: { | |
| type: "string", | |
| label: "Original Contract Date", | |
| description: "The date the engagement with the client started. Format: YYYY-MM-DD", | |
| optional: true, | |
| }, | |
| renewalDate: { | |
| type: "string", | |
| label: "Renewal Date", | |
| description: "The upcoming renewal date of the contract. Format: YYYY-MM-DD", | |
| optional: true, | |
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good call - thanks!
| description: "The name of the custom object.", | ||
| async options() { | ||
| const { data } = await this.listCustomObjects(); | ||
| return data/*?.filter?.((obj) => obj.objectType === "CUSTOM")*/.map(( { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is the filter meant to be commented out?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is, I commented it out for testing and forgot to remove the block afterwards - doing it now, thanks.
For the record, it seems several custom object types are not actually classified explicitly as "custom", hence why I removed this filter (it was returning no objects whatsoever with it)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 4
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
components/gainsight_nxt/gainsight_nxt.app.mjs (1)
61-67: Add JSDoc documentation for createOrUpdatePerson method.
The method would benefit from documentation describing the expected payload structure and required fields.
Add documentation:
+ /**
+ * Creates or updates a person record
+ * @param {Object} args - The person data
+ * @param {Object} args.data - The person properties
+ * @param {string} args.data.emailAddress - Primary email (required)
+ * @returns {Promise<Object>} The API response
+ */
async createOrUpdatePerson(args) {components/gainsight_nxt/actions/create-or-update-company/create-or-update-company.mjs (2)
22-27: Add pattern validation for ARR field.
Consider adding pattern validation to ensure proper currency format input.
arr: {
type: "string",
label: "Annual Recurring Revenue (ARR)",
description: "The annual recurring revenue of the company, as a currency value.",
+ pattern: "^\\$?\\d+(\\.\\d{2})?$",
+ placeholder: "$1000.00",
optional: true,
},77-88: Clarify CSM field descriptions.
The descriptions for CSM fields still use the unexplained abbreviation "POC". Consider updating for clarity.
csmFirstName: {
type: "string",
label: "CSM First Name",
- description: "The first name of the POC of the company.",
+ description: "The first name of the Customer Success Manager (CSM) of the company.",
optional: true,
},
csmLastName: {
type: "string",
label: "CSM Last Name",
- description: "The last name of the POC of the company.",
+ description: "The last name of the Customer Success Manager (CSM) of the company.",
optional: true,
},📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
- components/gainsight_nxt/actions/create-or-update-company/create-or-update-company.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/gainsight_nxt/gainsight_nxt.app.mjs (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (5)
components/gainsight_nxt/gainsight_nxt.app.mjs (2)
1-6: LGTM! Standard app setup.
The import and app definition follow Pipedream's conventions.
44-60: Refer to previous review comment about company methods.
A previous review already suggested extracting the common path to avoid duplication.
components/gainsight_nxt/actions/create-or-update-company/create-or-update-company.mjs (3)
1-8: LGTM! Component metadata is well-structured.
The component metadata follows best practices with:
- Descriptive name and key
- Documentation link in description
- Appropriate version numbering
1-1: Verify Gainsight NXT API integration.
Let's verify that the app methods match the API documentation.
Also applies to: 119-122, 129-132
✅ Verification successful
API integration is properly implemented and matches documentation
The verification confirms:
- Both
createCompanyandupdateCompanymethods are correctly implemented using appropriate HTTP methods (POST and PUT) - API endpoints use the correct path
/data/objects/Company - Authentication is properly configured using customer domain and access key
- Content type and accept headers are set correctly for JSON payloads
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify app methods and API integration
# Check if app methods are implemented
echo "Checking app implementation..."
rg -A 5 "updateCompany|createCompany" "components/gainsight_nxt/gainsight_nxt.app.mjs"
# Check for API endpoint configuration
echo "Checking API configuration..."
rg -A 5 "baseUrl|auth" "components/gainsight_nxt/gainsight_nxt.app.mjs"
Length of output: 1125
96-144:
Enhance input validation and error handling.
The run method would benefit from additional validation and improved error handling:
- Validate required fields before API calls
- Validate date formats if provided
- Improve error handling and logging
- Ensure consistent result handling
async run({ $ }) {
+ // Validate required fields
+ if (!this.name?.trim()) {
+ throw new Error("Company name is required");
+ }
+
+ // Validate date formats if provided
+ const dateFields = {
+ originalContractDate: this.originalContractDate,
+ renewalDate: this.renewalDate,
+ };
+ for (const [field, value] of Object.entries(dateFields)) {
+ if (value && !/^\d{4}-\d{2}-\d{2}$/.test(value)) {
+ throw new Error(`Invalid date format for ${field}. Expected: YYYY-MM-DD`);
+ }
+ }
const data = {
records: [
{
Name: this.name,
Industry: this.industry,
ARR: this.arr,
Employees: this.employees,
LifecycleInWeeks: this.lifecycleInWeeks,
OriginalContractDate: this.originalContractDate,
RenewalDate: this.renewalDate,
Stage: this.stage,
Status: this.status,
CSMFirstName: this.csmFirstName,
CSMLastName: this.csmLastName,
ParentCompanyName: this.parentCompanyName,
},
],
};
let summary = "";
let result;
try {
const updateReq = await this.app.updateCompany({
$,
data,
});
- result = updateReq;
- summary = updateReq.result === true
+ if (!updateReq?.result) {
+ throw new Error("Update failed: Company not found");
+ }
+ result = updateReq;
+ summary = updateReq.result === true
? `Successfully updated company '${this.name}'`
: `Error updating company '${this.name}'`;
}
catch (err) {
+ // Log the update error for debugging
+ console.log("Update failed:", err.message);
+
const createReq = await this.app.createCompany({
$,
data,
});
+ if (!createReq?.result) {
+ throw new Error("Failed to create company");
+ }
result = createReq;
summary = createReq.result === true
? `Successfully created company '${this.name}'`
: `Error creating company '${this.name}'`;
}
$.export(
"$summary",
summary,
);
return result;
},Likely invalid or redundant comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
components/gainsight_nxt/common/utils.mjs (1)
1-22: Consider adding comprehensive input validation and documentation.As these utilities are critical for API data transformation:
- Add JSDoc documentation describing expected input/output formats
- Consider adding input schema validation (e.g., using Zod or Joi)
- Add unit tests covering various edge cases
Would you like me to:
- Generate JSDoc documentation for these functions?
- Provide example schema validation implementation?
- Create unit test cases covering edge cases?
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
components/gainsight_nxt/actions/create-or-update-company/create-or-update-company.mjs(1 hunks)components/gainsight_nxt/common/utils.mjs(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
components/gainsight_nxt/actions/create-or-update-company/create-or-update-company.mjs (2)
86-132: Well-implemented 'run' method for creating or updating companies
The run method efficiently handles the logic for updating an existing company and gracefully falls back to creating a new one if the update fails. The control flow and error handling ensure that the action behaves reliably.
78-84: Flexible addition of extra parameters via 'additionalOptions'
The additionalOptions prop allows users to pass extra parameters dynamically, enhancing the flexibility and extensibility of the action.
| function optionalParseAsJSON(value) { | ||
| try { | ||
| return JSON.parse(value); | ||
| } catch (e) { | ||
| return value; | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider enhancing error handling and type safety.
While the function provides basic JSON parsing with fallback, consider these improvements for better robustness:
- Add input validation
- Handle undefined/null values
- Add error logging for debugging
-function optionalParseAsJSON(value) {
+function optionalParseAsJSON(value) {
+ if (value == null) return value;
+ if (typeof value !== 'string') return value;
try {
return JSON.parse(value);
} catch (e) {
+ console.debug(`Failed to parse JSON: ${e.message}`);
return value;
}
}📝 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.
| function optionalParseAsJSON(value) { | |
| try { | |
| return JSON.parse(value); | |
| } catch (e) { | |
| return value; | |
| } | |
| } | |
| function optionalParseAsJSON(value) { | |
| if (value == null) return value; | |
| if (typeof value !== 'string') return value; | |
| try { | |
| return JSON.parse(value); | |
| } catch (e) { | |
| console.debug(`Failed to parse JSON: ${e.message}`); | |
| return value; | |
| } | |
| } |
| export function parseObjectEntries(value) { | ||
| const obj = typeof value === "string" | ||
| ? JSON.parse(value) | ||
| : value; | ||
| return Object.fromEntries( | ||
| Object.entries(obj).map(([ | ||
| key, | ||
| value, | ||
| ]) => [ | ||
| key, | ||
| optionalParseAsJSON(value), | ||
| ]), | ||
| ); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add defensive programming measures.
The function needs better error handling and input validation to prevent runtime errors:
- Direct
JSON.parsecall could throw on invalid JSON - No null/undefined checks before accessing Object methods
- No validation of object structure
Apply these improvements:
export function parseObjectEntries(value) {
+ if (value == null) {
+ throw new Error('Input value cannot be null or undefined');
+ }
+
const obj = typeof value === "string"
- ? JSON.parse(value)
+ ? optionalParseAsJSON(value)
: value;
+
+ if (typeof obj !== 'object' || Array.isArray(obj)) {
+ throw new Error('Input must be an object or valid JSON object string');
+ }
+
return Object.fromEntries(
Object.entries(obj).map(([
key,
value,
]) => [
key,
optionalParseAsJSON(value),
]),
);
}📝 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.
| export function parseObjectEntries(value) { | |
| const obj = typeof value === "string" | |
| ? JSON.parse(value) | |
| : value; | |
| return Object.fromEntries( | |
| Object.entries(obj).map(([ | |
| key, | |
| value, | |
| ]) => [ | |
| key, | |
| optionalParseAsJSON(value), | |
| ]), | |
| ); | |
| } | |
| export function parseObjectEntries(value) { | |
| if (value == null) { | |
| throw new Error('Input value cannot be null or undefined'); | |
| } | |
| const obj = typeof value === "string" | |
| ? optionalParseAsJSON(value) | |
| : value; | |
| if (typeof obj !== 'object' || Array.isArray(obj)) { | |
| throw new Error('Input must be an object or valid JSON object string'); | |
| } | |
| return Object.fromEntries( | |
| Object.entries(obj).map(([ | |
| key, | |
| value, | |
| ]) => [ | |
| key, | |
| optionalParseAsJSON(value), | |
| ]), | |
| ); | |
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
components/gainsight_nxt/gainsight_nxt.app.mjs (1)
61-67: Standardize API version and add error handling for person creationThe person management endpoint uses a different path pattern (
/peoplemgmt/v1.0/) compared to other endpoints. Consider:
- Standardizing API version across all endpoints
- Adding specific error handling for common failure cases
Consider implementing:
- API version constant
- Specific error handling for duplicate records
+ static API_VERSION = 'v1.0'; + async createOrUpdatePerson(args) { + try { return this._makeRequest({ - path: "/peoplemgmt/v1.0/people", + path: `/peoplemgmt/${this.constructor.API_VERSION}/people`, method: "PUT", ...args, }); + } catch (error) { + if (error.response?.status === 409) { + // Handle duplicate person + throw new Error('Person already exists with different identifier'); + } + throw error; + } },
| async updateCompany(args) { | ||
| return this._makeRequest({ | ||
| path: "/data/objects/Company", | ||
| method: "PUT", | ||
| params: { | ||
| keys: "Name", | ||
| }, | ||
| ...args, | ||
| }); | ||
| }, | ||
| async createCompany(args) { | ||
| return this._makeRequest({ | ||
| path: "/data/objects/Company", | ||
| method: "POST", | ||
| ...args, | ||
| }); | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Add retry logic for company operations
The company creation/update methods could benefit from retry logic with exponential backoff for transient failures.
Consider implementing a retry wrapper:
+ async _withRetry(operation, maxRetries = 3) {
+ for (let i = 0; i < maxRetries; i++) {
+ try {
+ return await operation();
+ } catch (error) {
+ if (i === maxRetries - 1 || !this._isRetryable(error)) throw error;
+ await new Promise(r => setTimeout(r, Math.pow(2, i) * 1000));
+ }
+ }
+ },
+
async updateCompany(args) {
- return this._makeRequest({
+ return this._withRetry(() => this._makeRequest({
path: "/data/objects/Company",
method: "PUT",
params: {
keys: "Name",
},
...args,
- });
+ }));
},Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
| async _makeRequest({ | ||
| $ = this, | ||
| path, | ||
| headers = {}, | ||
| ...otherOpts | ||
| } = {}) { | ||
| return axios($, { | ||
| ...otherOpts, | ||
| url: this._baseUrl() + path, | ||
| headers: { | ||
| "content-type": "application/json", | ||
| "accept": "application/json, text/plain, */*", | ||
| "accept-language": "en-GB,en-US;q=0.9,en;q=0.8", | ||
| "accesskey": `${this.$auth.access_key}`, | ||
| ...headers, | ||
| }, | ||
| }); | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add path parameter validation in _makeRequest
The path parameter is directly concatenated with the base URL, which could lead to path traversal issues. Consider adding validation to ensure the path:
- Starts with a forward slash
- Contains no relative path segments (../)
- Contains only allowed characters
Add path validation:
async _makeRequest({
$ = this,
path,
headers = {},
...otherOpts
} = {}) {
+ if (!path || typeof path !== 'string' || !path.startsWith('/') ||
+ path.includes('../') || !/^[\w\-./]+$/.test(path)) {
+ throw new Error('Invalid path parameter');
+ }
return axios($, {
...otherOpts,
url: this._baseUrl() + path,📝 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 _makeRequest({ | |
| $ = this, | |
| path, | |
| headers = {}, | |
| ...otherOpts | |
| } = {}) { | |
| return axios($, { | |
| ...otherOpts, | |
| url: this._baseUrl() + path, | |
| headers: { | |
| "content-type": "application/json", | |
| "accept": "application/json, text/plain, */*", | |
| "accept-language": "en-GB,en-US;q=0.9,en;q=0.8", | |
| "accesskey": `${this.$auth.access_key}`, | |
| ...headers, | |
| }, | |
| }); | |
| }, | |
| async _makeRequest({ | |
| $ = this, | |
| path, | |
| headers = {}, | |
| ...otherOpts | |
| } = {}) { | |
| if (!path || typeof path !== 'string' || !path.startsWith('/') || | |
| path.includes('../') || !/^[\w\-./]+$/.test(path)) { | |
| throw new Error('Invalid path parameter'); | |
| } | |
| return axios($, { | |
| ...otherOpts, | |
| url: this._baseUrl() + path, | |
| headers: { | |
| "content-type": "application/json", | |
| "accept": "application/json, text/plain, */*", | |
| "accept-language": "en-GB,en-US;q=0.9,en;q=0.8", | |
| "accesskey": `${this.$auth.access_key}`, | |
| ...headers, | |
| }, | |
| }); | |
| }, |
| return data?.filter?.((obj) => obj.objectType === "CUSTOM").map(( { | ||
| label, objectName, | ||
| }) => ({ | ||
| label, | ||
| value: objectName, | ||
| })); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Based on the code analysis, I can now provide a final response:
Remove the objectType filter to support all valid object types
The current implementation filters objects by objectType === "CUSTOM", but the API endpoints show that the integration handles various object types including built-in ones like "Company". The filter should be removed as it may exclude valid objects that can be operated on through the /data/objects/{objectName} endpoints.
- Remove the filter at line 13:
data?.filter?.((obj) => obj.objectType === "CUSTOM") - Keep only the mapping part to return all available objects:
data?.map(({label, objectName}) => ({label, value: objectName}))
🔗 Analysis chain
Reconsider the custom object type filter
Based on the previous discussion, several custom object types may not be explicitly classified as "CUSTOM", which could result in missing valid objects. Consider either:
- Removing the filter to show all available objects, or
- Validating the complete list of object types to ensure no valid objects are excluded
Let's verify the object types:
Let me search for more specific information about Gainsight NXT's object types.
Let me check the API implementation and any test files that might reveal the expected object types.
Let me fix the regex and try again.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check the available object types in the API response
rg -A 5 "objectType.*=.*" .
Length of output: 17301
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any references to object types or API responses in Gainsight NXT files
rg -A 5 "objectType|getObjects|listObjects" components/gainsight_nxt/
Length of output: 534
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for API calls and test files related to object types in Gainsight NXT
rg -g "*.{mjs,js,test.js}" -B 3 -A 5 "\/objects|\/custom-objects|objectTypes" components/gainsight_nxt/
Length of output: 210
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for API calls and test files related to object types in Gainsight NXT
rg -g "*.{mjs,js,test.js}" -B 3 -A 5 "(objects|custom-objects|objectTypes)" components/gainsight_nxt/
# Also search for any API-related code that might show object type handling
ast-grep --pattern 'async $FUNC($$$) {
$$$
const $_ = await this.$_.$_($$$)
$$$
}' components/gainsight_nxt/
Length of output: 3201
|
/approve |
Closes #14373
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation
Chores