Refactor components to process tab (instead of test tab)#290
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
|
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces a comprehensive refactoring of the automation and rule processing components in the web application. The changes primarily focus on renaming and restructuring components related to test and process rules, introducing a new Changes
Sequence DiagramsequenceDiagram
participant User
participant TestCustomEmailForm
participant testAiCustomContentAction
participant ProcessResultDisplay
User->>TestCustomEmailForm: Enter email content
TestCustomEmailForm->>testAiCustomContentAction: Submit content
testAiCustomContentAction-->>TestCustomEmailForm: Return result
TestCustomEmailForm->>ProcessResultDisplay: Display result
Possibly related PRs
Poem
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: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (8)
apps/web/app/(app)/automation/Process.tsx (1)
37-37: Consider clarifying the boolean logic for testModeCurrently,
testMode={!applyMode}is readable but may cause confusion. Consider renaming the prop or the state to indicate the inverse relationship more clearly, e.g.isTestModevsisApplyMode.apps/web/app/(app)/automation/TestCustomEmailForm.tsx (1)
1-69: Suggestions for improving form handling and dependencies
useCallbackdependencies: TheonSubmitcallback referencestestAiCustomContentAction,toastError, andsetTestResultfrom outside but has an empty dependency array. If these values change, the callback might become stale. Hence, consider including them in the dependency array.Error handling: The current error toast displays the raw error string. Consider adding more contextual details (e.g., “Custom email testing failed”) to help users pinpoint issues quickly.
Input usage: You’re already registering the form field, so the explicit
name="content"attribute may be redundant. You can rely on theregisterPropsfromreact-hook-form.Validation enhancements: You might consider a maximum length constraint on the email content to prevent overly large inputs from causing performance or user experience spikes.
apps/web/app/(app)/automation/ProcessResultDisplay.tsx (1)
1-123: Minor improvements for result display
“No rule matched” scenario: Consider adding a quick link or call to action prompting users to create a new rule if needed. This can improve user experience when they see repeated “No rule matched” messages.
Truncation logic: For AI instructions, you currently apply a substring up to
MAX_LENGTH. You might want to show a “Show more” toggle for lengthier instructions to maintain flexibility.Action items structure: The filtering and display logic is approachable, but for future expandability, consider storing related fields in a structured or typed format (e.g.
type ActionItem = { type: string; label?: string; ... }). This could avoid accidental key omissions.apps/web/utils/actions/validation.ts (1)
162-166: Optional: Add more constraints totestAiCustomContentBodyA minimum length is enforced, which is good. For additional safety and clarity, consider adding a sensible maximum length limit and optional checks (e.g., forbidding certain disallowed characters) to handle user input more robustly.
apps/web/app/(app)/automation/ProcessRules.tsx (3)
39-40: Check naming consistency.While the new
TestCustomEmailFormandProcessResultDisplayimports indicate a refined approach to rule processing, consider renamingTestCustomEmailFormto maintain parity with “Process-” naming across the file for clarity.
171-171: Consider renaming the form for clarity.
<TestCustomEmailForm />is a neatly integrated addition, but the “Test” prefix may cause confusion under a “Process” context. Evaluate a name change if your roadmap envisions further expansions.
255-255: Display logic appears correct.
<ProcessResultDisplay />is a clean way to show outcomes. Consider appending contextual details (like a prefix) if more clarity is needed in multi-result views.apps/web/utils/actions/ai-rule.ts (1)
136-141: Robust validation flow.
testAiCustomContentActioncleanly delegates parsing totestAiCustomContentBody.safeParse. Consider elaborating on error messages if user input is frequently malformed.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (7)
apps/web/app/(app)/automation/Process.tsx(2 hunks)apps/web/app/(app)/automation/ProcessResultDisplay.tsx(1 hunks)apps/web/app/(app)/automation/ProcessRules.tsx(6 hunks)apps/web/app/(app)/automation/ReportMistake.tsx(5 hunks)apps/web/app/(app)/automation/TestCustomEmailForm.tsx(1 hunks)apps/web/utils/actions/ai-rule.ts(2 hunks)apps/web/utils/actions/validation.ts(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (11)
apps/web/app/(app)/automation/Process.tsx (1)
4-4: ReplacedTestRulesContentwithProcessRulesContentThis rename is consistent with the new “Process” terminology. Ensure that all references to the old component have been removed.
apps/web/app/(app)/automation/ProcessRules.tsx (4)
22-22: Validate correct usage of the imported function.The
runRulesActionimport integrates seamlessly with theonRuncallback below. Ensure continued alignment with any future refactoring of AI-rule actions.
44-44: Consistent refactoring from Test to Process.Renaming
TestRulesContenttoProcessRulesContentaligns with the revised component focus. The overall logic and prop usage appear consistent.
187-187: Good rename to enhance clarity.Replacing
TestRulesContentRowwith<ProcessRulesRow />better conveys its focus on rule processing. Confirm all references and states are updated accordingly.
218-218: Encourage unit testing for added confidence.
ProcessRulesRowis well-structured. Adding targeted unit tests will help validate logic changes, especially for edge cases like reruns and error handling.apps/web/app/(app)/automation/ReportMistake.tsx (5)
44-44: New import verified.The import of
ProcessResultDisplayis properly referenced and replaces old test-based components. No issues found.
302-302: Confirm shape alignment with RunRulesResult.
<ProcessResultDisplay result={{ rule: fixedInstructionsRule }} />passes an object containing only aruleproperty. Confirm that no other fields are needed for consistent display of results.
341-341: Implementation looks good.Direct use of
<ProcessResultDisplay result={result} />matches the desired refactoring. No concerns here.
464-464: Prefix usage is clear.Adding the
prefix="Matched: "improves user readability. This is a neat addition.
767-767: Result reuse is clean.Re-running and showing
<ProcessResultDisplay result={testResult} />ensures consistent outcome visualization. Looks tidy.apps/web/utils/actions/ai-rule.ts (1)
36-37: Additional schema usage recognized.
testAiCustomContentBodyis properly exported. Ensure references remain synchronized withtype TestAiCustomContentBody.
1 participant
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
ProcessResultDisplaycomponent for displaying rule processing resultsTestCustomEmailFormfor testing custom email content with AIRefactor
Bug Fixes