[BUG] CodeInterpreterTool cannot handle mutli-line code

[MahlerTom]

Fixes bug reported in issue #158.

Problems identified:

1. Use of f-string causes text parsing problems, changed it to a list[str]
2. Type hinting was not properly applied, fixed that using proper imports.

Changes made:

1. Instead of using f-strings in exec_run here: container.exec_run(f"pip install {library}") and here: cmd_to_run = f'python3 -c "{code}"', not using list: container.exec_run(["pip", "install", library]) and container.exec_run(["python3", "-c", code]).
2. Proper imports from docker
3. Fixed CodeInterpreterTool unit testing
4. Added unit testing for multi-line code.

Now, when running the example from issue #158:

from crewai_tools import CodeInterpreterTool

code = """print("Hello, ")
print("World!)"""

print(CodeInterpreterTool().run_code_in_docker(code=code, libraries_used=[]))

The code runs and we can see the results properly:

Hello, 
World!

[joaomdmoura]

Disclaimer: This review was made by a crew of AI Agents.

Code Review Comment for PR #159

Overview

This pull request tackles improvements in the code_interpreter_tool.py file, focusing on two major aspects: enhancing security in command execution and improving type hints and import organization. The adjustments made are a step in the right direction for both code quality and security.

Specific Code Improvements

1. Security in Library Installation

   • Current Implementation

     container.exec_run(["pip", "install", library])

   • Recommended Improvement

     container.exec_run(["pip", "install", "--no-cache-dir", "--disable-pip-version-check", library])

   • Justification: Adding these flags enhances security by preventing image bloating and unnecessary warnings.

2. Error Handling in Code Execution

   • Current Implementation

     exec_result = container.exec_run(["python3", "-c", code])

   • Recommended Improvement

     exec_result = container.exec_run(["python3", "-c", code])
     if exec_result.exit_code != 0:
         return f"Error executing code: {exec_result.output.decode('utf-8')}"
     return exec_result.output.decode('utf-8')

   • Justification: Providing feedback in case of an execution error greatly improves user experience.

3. Enhancements in Type Hinting

   • Current Function Signature

     def _run(self, **kwargs) -> str:

   • Recommended Improvement

     def _run(self, code: str, libraries_used: Optional[List[str]] = None) -> str:

   • Justification: Clarity in expected parameters improves code readability.

Historical Context and Related Learning

This PR follows the previous discussions about best practices in type hinting and secure command executions, as seen in related pull requests and recent issues faced regarding command injection vulnerabilities.

Implications for Related Files

The changes made in this PR may impact other components that interact with code_interpreter_tool.py, especially where Docker container operations are invoked. A thorough testing of downstream effects is advisable to confirm no unintended consequences arise from the adjustments.

Additional Recommendations

1. Implement a Wrapper for Error Handling

   def safe_container_exec(self, container: Container, command: List[str]) -> tuple[int, str]:
       try:
           result = container.exec_run(command)
           return (result.exit_code, result.output.decode('utf-8'))
       except Exception as e:
           return (1, f"Error executing command: {str(e)}")

2. Utilize a Context Manager for Container Management

   from contextlib import contextmanager
   
   @contextmanager
   def managed_container(self):
       container = self._init_docker_container()
       try:
           yield container
       finally:
           container.stop()
           container.remove()

Summary

The proposed changes in this pull request significantly enhance the security posture of the Docker command executions while improving the code's readability through comprehensive type hints. Nevertheless, further enhancements in error handling and documentation will bolster the overall code quality. These adjustments showcase a positive step towards a more robust codebase.

---

This comment encapsulates a constructive review while maintaining focus on improvements and their implications. It encourages a collaborative effort to refine the tool even further.