Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Components] clarify - new components #14762

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

jcortes
Copy link
Collaborator

@jcortes jcortes commented Nov 28, 2024

WHY

Resolves #14681

WIP

Summary by CodeRabbit

Release Notes

  • New Features

    • Introduced modules for creating, finding, and updating company and person records within the Clarify system.
    • Added webhook management for new company and person events, enabling real-time notifications.
    • Implemented event handling for company addition and person creation, enhancing user interaction tracking.
  • Improvements

    • Enhanced the application structure with new constants and utility methods for API interactions.
    • Updated the application version to 0.1.0, reflecting significant enhancements.
  • Bug Fixes

    • Improved error handling in user search and record update functionalities.

@jcortes jcortes added action New Action Request trigger / source New trigger / source request labels Nov 28, 2024
@jcortes jcortes self-assigned this Nov 28, 2024
Copy link

vercel bot commented Nov 28, 2024

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

3 Skipped Deployments
Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
docs-v2 ⬜️ Ignored (Inspect) Nov 28, 2024 3:49pm
pipedream-docs ⬜️ Ignored (Inspect) Nov 28, 2024 3:49pm
pipedream-docs-redirect-do-not-edit ⬜️ Ignored (Inspect) Nov 28, 2024 3:49pm

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Nov 28, 2024

Walkthrough

This pull request introduces several new modules and enhancements to the Clarify system, including functionalities for creating, finding, and updating company and person records. New constants and methods are added to improve API interactions, and event handling for new company and person creations is implemented. The package.json file is updated to reflect a new version and added dependencies. Overall, these changes expand the capabilities of the Clarify application, facilitating more robust data management and event handling.

Changes

File Path Change Summary
components/clarify/actions/create-company/create-company.mjs New module for creating company records with createCompany and run methods. Properties app, workspace, name, and domain added.
components/clarify/actions/find-user/find-user.mjs New module for finding users by email with optional first and last name parameters, including getUsers and run methods.
components/clarify/actions/update-person/update-person.mjs New module for updating person records with updatePerson and run methods. Properties workspace, personId, and companyId added.
components/clarify/clarify.app.mjs Enhanced propDefinitions with new properties and methods for handling API requests, including listCompanies and listPeople.
components/clarify/common/constants.mjs New module defining API-related constants, including BASE_URL, VERSION_PATH, and OBJECT_ENTITY.
components/clarify/package.json Updated version from 0.0.1 to 0.1.0 and added dependency on @pipedream/platform.
components/clarify/sources/common/events.mjs New module exporting constants for event types: CREATE, UPDATE, and DELETE.
components/clarify/sources/common/webhook.mjs New module for managing webhooks with methods for creating and deleting webhooks, including activate and deactivate.
components/clarify/sources/company-added-to-list-instant/company-added-to-list-instant.mjs New module for webhook source when a company is added to a list, including methods for event handling.
components/clarify/sources/company-added-to-list-instant/test-event.mjs New module representing a company entity with various properties for tracking and metadata.
components/clarify/sources/new-company-instant/new-company-instant.mjs New module for handling new company events with methods for event type and metadata generation.
components/clarify/sources/new-company-instant/test-event.mjs New module representing a company profile with various properties for tracking and metadata.
components/clarify/sources/new-person-instant/new-person-instant.mjs New module for handling new person events with methods for event type and metadata generation.
components/clarify/sources/new-person-instant/test-event.mjs New module representing a person entity with various properties for tracking and metadata.

Assessment against linked issues

Objective Addressed Explanation
Emit new event when a fresh company is created. (Issue #14681)
Emit new event when a company is added to a list. (Issue #14681)
Emit new event when a new person is created. (Issue #14681)
Create a new company record in the Clarify system. (Issue #14681)
Search for a user based on the given email prop. (Issue #14681)
Update existing person record in the Clarify system. (Issue #14681)

Possibly related PRs

Suggested reviewers

  • michelle0927

🐇 In the meadow, new records bloom,
With companies and people, there's plenty of room.
From creation to updates, we hop with delight,
In the world of Clarify, everything feels right!
So let’s celebrate this code, oh so bright! 🌼✨


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?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 18

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (11)
components/clarify/sources/new-company-instant/new-company-instant.mjs (1)

9-9: Consider updating the documentation link

The current link points to a generic Swagger endpoint. Consider linking to a more specific section of the documentation that details webhook creation for company events.

components/clarify/sources/new-person-instant/new-person-instant.mjs (1)

6-13: LGTM! Consider enhancing the documentation.

The configuration is well-structured. However, the documentation link could be more specific about the webhook payload structure and any required configurations.

-  description: "Emit new event when a new person is created. [See the documentation](https://api.getclarify.ai/swagger#/default/createWebhook).",
+  description: "Emit new event when a new person is created. [See the webhook configuration and payload documentation](https://api.getclarify.ai/swagger#/default/createWebhook).",
components/clarify/actions/create-company/create-company.mjs (3)

31-40: Consider adding input validation for workspace parameter

While the method implementation is good, consider adding validation for the workspace parameter since it's used in the API path construction.

 createCompany({
   workspace, ...args
 } = {}) {
+  if (!workspace) {
+    throw new Error("Workspace ID is required");
+  }
   return this.app.post({
     path: `/workspaces/${workspace}/objects/${constants.OBJECT_ENTITY.COMPANY}/records`,
     ...args,
   });
 },

67-68: Enhance the success message with company details

The current success message could be more informative by including the company name.

-    $.export("$summary", "Successfully created company.");
+    $.export("$summary", `Successfully created company "${name}"`);

1-70: Overall implementation meets requirements with good extensibility

The component successfully implements the create-company action as specified in the PR objectives (#14681). The addition of domain support extends the functionality in a meaningful way while maintaining clean code structure and following Pipedream's best practices.

Consider documenting the domain functionality in the PR description since it's an enhancement beyond the original requirements.

components/clarify/actions/update-person/update-person.mjs (1)

47-71: Enhance the update implementation and success message

A few suggestions for improvement:

  1. The attributes object should include all optional update fields
  2. The success message should indicate what was actually updated

Example implementation:

 async run({ $ }) {
   const {
     updatePerson,
     workspace,
     personId,
     companyId,
+    email,
+    name,
   } = this;

+  const attributes = {};
+  if (companyId) attributes.companyId = companyId;
+  if (email) attributes.email = email;
+  if (name) attributes.name = name;
+
+  if (Object.keys(attributes).length === 0) {
+    throw new Error("At least one field to update must be provided");
+  }

   const response = await updatePerson({
     $,
     workspace,
     personId,
     data: {
       data: {
         type: "object",
-        attributes: {
-          companyId,
-        },
+        attributes,
       },
     },
   });

-  $.export("$summary", "Successfully updated person.");
+  $.export("$summary", `Successfully updated person with fields: ${Object.keys(attributes).join(", ")}`);
   return response;
 },
components/clarify/actions/find-user/find-user.mjs (1)

9-34: Add email validation and consider enhancing search flexibility.

Consider the following improvements:

  1. Add email format validation to prevent invalid inputs
  2. Add a caseSensitive boolean prop to control name matching behavior
 email: {
   type: "string",
   label: "Email",
   description: "The email of the user to search for.",
+  pattern: "^[a-zA-Z0-9._%+-]+@[a-zA-Z0-9.-]+\\.[a-zA-Z]{2,}$",
 },
+caseSensitive: {
+  type: "boolean",
+  label: "Case Sensitive Search",
+  description: "Enable case-sensitive matching for name fields",
+  optional: true,
+  default: false,
+},
components/clarify/sources/common/webhook.mjs (2)

72-74: Add error handling to processResource method

The processResource method should handle potential errors during event emission.

Consider implementing:

 processResource(resource) {
+  if (!resource) {
+    console.warn("Received empty resource");
+    return;
+  }
+  try {
     this.$emit(resource, this.generateMeta(resource));
+  } catch (error) {
+    console.error("Failed to process resource:", error);
+    throw error;
+  }
 }

1-95: Add JSDoc documentation and usage examples

This module serves as a base implementation for webhook handlers. Adding comprehensive documentation would help other developers extend and use this class correctly.

Consider adding:

  1. JSDoc comments for the class and methods
  2. Usage examples in the comments
  3. Documentation about required implementations (getEntity, getEventType, generateMeta)
  4. Type definitions for the expected webhook payload structure

Example:

/**
 * Base webhook handler for Clarify components.
 * @example
 * // Implement a new company webhook
 * export default {
 *   ...webhook,
 *   methods: {
 *     getEntity() {
 *       return "company";
 *     },
 *     getEventType() {
 *       return "created";
 *     },
 *     generateMeta(resource) {
 *       return {
 *         id: resource.id,
 *         summary: `New company ${resource.name} created`,
 *         ts: Date.now(),
 *       };
 *     },
 *   },
 * };
 */
components/clarify/clarify.app.mjs (2)

119-124: Ensure custom headers can override default headers by adjusting spread order

Currently, custom headers passed to getHeaders may be overridden by default headers. To allow custom headers to override defaults, spread ...headers after the default headers.

Apply this diff to adjust the order:

           "Authorization": `Bearer ${this.$auth.oauth_access_token}`,
           "Content-Type": "application/json",
           "Accept": "application/json",
-          ...headers,
+          ...headers,

131-131: Consider making the 'debug' setting configurable or removing it in production

Setting debug: true in every request may expose sensitive information in logs and impact performance. It's advisable to make this setting configurable or remove it in production environments.

Apply this diff to address the issue:

-            debug: true,
+            // debug: true, // Remove or make configurable
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between b920895 and a116ec0.

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
  • pnpm-lock.yaml is excluded by !**/pnpm-lock.yaml
📒 Files selected for processing (14)
  • components/clarify/actions/create-company/create-company.mjs (1 hunks)
  • components/clarify/actions/find-user/find-user.mjs (1 hunks)
  • components/clarify/actions/update-person/update-person.mjs (1 hunks)
  • components/clarify/clarify.app.mjs (1 hunks)
  • components/clarify/common/constants.mjs (1 hunks)
  • components/clarify/package.json (2 hunks)
  • components/clarify/sources/common/events.mjs (1 hunks)
  • components/clarify/sources/common/webhook.mjs (1 hunks)
  • components/clarify/sources/company-added-to-list-instant/company-added-to-list-instant.mjs (1 hunks)
  • components/clarify/sources/company-added-to-list-instant/test-event.mjs (1 hunks)
  • components/clarify/sources/new-company-instant/new-company-instant.mjs (1 hunks)
  • components/clarify/sources/new-company-instant/test-event.mjs (1 hunks)
  • components/clarify/sources/new-person-instant/new-person-instant.mjs (1 hunks)
  • components/clarify/sources/new-person-instant/test-event.mjs (1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (5)
  • components/clarify/common/constants.mjs
  • components/clarify/sources/common/events.mjs
  • components/clarify/sources/company-added-to-list-instant/test-event.mjs
  • components/clarify/sources/new-company-instant/test-event.mjs
  • components/clarify/sources/new-person-instant/test-event.mjs
🔇 Additional comments (13)
components/clarify/package.json (2)

3-3: Version bump follows semver guidelines

The version increment from 0.0.1 to 0.1.0 appropriately reflects the addition of new features (company and person management components) without breaking changes.


15-17: Verify @pipedream/platform version

Let's ensure we're using the latest stable version of the platform package that's compatible with the new components.

✅ Verification successful

Version 3.0.3 of @pipedream/platform is up to date

The installed version (3.0.3) matches the latest published version on npm registry.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check latest @pipedream/platform version and its usage
# Expected: Confirm if 3.0.3 is the latest stable version and how it's used

# Check latest version from npm
echo "Latest published version:"
npm view @pipedream/platform version

# Check how the platform package is used in the components
echo -e "\nPlatform package usage in components:"
rg -l "@pipedream/platform" components/clarify/

Length of output: 357

components/clarify/sources/new-company-instant/new-company-instant.mjs (2)

1-3: LGTM! Imports are well-organized

The imports are appropriate for the component's functionality and follow consistent patterns.


5-29: Verify webhook registration implementation

The component implements the required "new-company-instant" source, but let's verify the webhook setup inherited from common.

✅ Verification successful

Let me gather more information about the webhook implementation by checking the common source code.


Let me check the app implementation to verify the webhook creation functionality.


Let me check the events constant that's being used in the implementation.


Based on the comprehensive verification performed, I can now provide the final response:

Webhook implementation is properly structured and secure

The webhook implementation in the new-company-instant source is correctly structured with:

  • Proper webhook registration/deregistration through common webhook base
  • Secure HTTP endpoint handling
  • Correct entity and event type implementations
  • Proper deduplication with dedupe: "unique"

The component inherits from a robust common webhook implementation that handles:

  • Webhook lifecycle (activate/deactivate hooks)
  • Proper workspace-scoped webhook registration
  • Secure webhook ID storage in database
  • Standard webhook deletion on deactivation
🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check webhook registration implementation in common
echo "Checking webhook registration in common:"
rg -A 10 "registerHook|setupWebhook" components/clarify/common/webhook.mjs

# Verify event handling consistency across components
echo -e "\nChecking event handling in other components:"
rg "getEventType|getEntity" components/clarify/sources/

Length of output: 1647


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check the common implementation that's being imported
echo "Checking common implementation:"
cat components/clarify/sources/common/webhook.mjs

# Check if there are any other webhook-related files
echo -e "\nChecking for other webhook files:"
fd webhook

Length of output: 11245


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check the app implementation for webhook-related methods
echo "Checking Clarify app implementation:"
cat components/clarify/clarify.app.mjs

# Check constants used in the implementation
echo -e "\nChecking constants:"
cat components/clarify/common/constants.mjs

Length of output: 4647


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Look for events constant definition
echo "Checking for events constant:"
rg -l "events" components/clarify/
cat components/clarify/common/events.mjs 2>/dev/null || echo "events.mjs not found in expected location"

# Check if events are defined elsewhere
echo -e "\nSearching for CREATE event definition:"
rg -A 2 "CREATE.*=.*" components/clarify/

Length of output: 607

components/clarify/sources/new-person-instant/new-person-instant.mjs (2)

30-30: Verify test event structure

Let's ensure the test event contains all necessary fields for proper testing.

✅ Verification successful

Test event structure is well-defined and contains essential fields

The test event structure is comprehensive and includes all the necessary fields for a person entity:

  • Core identity fields (_id, name components, company_id)
  • Contact information (email_addresses, phone_numbers)
  • Social media profiles
  • Interaction timestamps
  • System metadata (_created_by, _created_at, _enriched_at)
🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check the test event structure
cat components/clarify/sources/new-person-instant/test-event.mjs

Length of output: 1029


8-8: Verify component naming convention

Let's confirm that the component key follows the established naming pattern for Clarify components.

✅ Verification successful

Component key follows consistent naming pattern

The component key "clarify-new-person-instant" follows the established naming convention used across all Clarify components:

  • Sources use pattern: clarify-[event]-instant (e.g., "clarify-new-person-instant", "clarify-new-company-instant")
  • Actions use pattern: clarify-[action] (e.g., "clarify-create-company", "clarify-find-user")
🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check naming patterns in other Clarify components
fd -e mjs -e js -p "components/clarify" -x grep -l "key.*clarify-" {} \;

Length of output: 489


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check the actual key values in these files to verify the naming pattern
for file in $(fd -e mjs -e js -p "components/clarify"); do
    echo "=== $file ==="
    grep -A 1 "key:" "$file" || true
done

Length of output: 4061

components/clarify/sources/company-added-to-list-instant/company-added-to-list-instant.mjs (1)

6-31: Verify consistency with other Clarify components

Let's ensure this implementation follows the same patterns as other Clarify components.

✅ Verification successful

Let me gather more specific information about the implementation patterns.


Let me check the common webhook implementation since it's a crucial part of the pattern.


Implementation is consistent with other Clarify components

The implementation follows the established patterns across Clarify components:

  • Correctly extends the common webhook implementation
  • Implements required methods: getEntity(), getEventType(), and generateMeta()
  • Uses consistent imports and constants
  • Follows the same structure for event handling and metadata generation

The only minor difference is in the resource field names (id vs _id and created_at vs _created_at), which is expected as this handles a different event type (list addition vs creation).

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for consistency in implementation patterns across Clarify components

# Find all similar component files
echo "Checking other Clarify component implementations:"
fd -e mjs -p "components/clarify/sources/.+/.+\.mjs$" --exclude "*test*" --exclude "*common*"

# Check for consistent method patterns
echo -e "\nChecking method implementations:"
ast-grep --pattern 'methods: {
  $$$
  getEntity() {
    $$$
  },
  getEventType() {
    $$$
  },
  generateMeta(resource) {
    $$$
  }
  $$$
}'

Length of output: 664


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check the implementation details of other Clarify source components

echo "=== Checking new-person-instant implementation ==="
cat components/clarify/sources/new-person-instant/new-person-instant.mjs

echo -e "\n=== Checking new-company-instant implementation ==="
cat components/clarify/sources/new-company-instant/new-company-instant.mjs

# Also check the common file that's being imported
echo -e "\n=== Checking common implementation ==="
fd -e mjs -p "components/clarify/sources/.+/common\.mjs$" -x cat {}

Length of output: 2205


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check the common webhook implementation
echo "=== Checking webhook common implementation ==="
cat components/clarify/sources/common/webhook.mjs

echo -e "\n=== Checking events implementation ==="
cat components/clarify/sources/common/events.mjs

echo -e "\n=== Checking constants implementation ==="
cat components/clarify/common/constants.mjs

Length of output: 2961

components/clarify/actions/create-company/create-company.mjs (2)

1-9: LGTM! Component metadata and imports are well-structured.

The component follows Pipedream's standard patterns with proper imports, documentation links, and versioning.


10-30: Verify prop definitions in clarify.app.mjs

The props structure looks good, but let's verify that all referenced propDefinitions exist in the app file.

✅ Verification successful

All prop definitions are present and correctly defined

The file content shows that all required propDefinitions exist in clarify.app.mjs with proper type definitions:

  • workspace: string type with async options for workspace selection
  • companyName: string type for company name input
  • companyDomain: string type for company domain input
🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if all propDefinitions exist in the app file
# Expected: Should find definitions for workspace, companyName, and companyDomain

ast-grep --pattern 'propDefinitions: {
  $$$
  workspace: $_,
  $$$
  companyName: $_,
  $$$
  companyDomain: $_,
  $$$
}' components/clarify/clarify.app.mjs

Length of output: 159


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to find prop definitions
# First, let's check if the file exists and see its content
cat components/clarify/clarify.app.mjs

# As a backup, let's also search for these prop names individually
echo "=== Searching for workspace prop ==="
rg "workspace.*{" components/clarify/clarify.app.mjs -A 5

echo "=== Searching for companyName prop ==="
rg "companyName.*{" components/clarify/clarify.app.mjs -A 5

echo "=== Searching for companyDomain prop ==="
rg "companyDomain.*{" components/clarify/clarify.app.mjs -A 5

Length of output: 4847

components/clarify/actions/update-person/update-person.mjs (3)

37-46: LGTM! Clean and well-structured method implementation

The updatePerson method is well implemented with:

  • Proper parameter destructuring
  • Correct API path construction using constants
  • Flexible argument passing using spread operator

1-9: Verify the imported constants usage across the codebase

The constants import seems correct, but let's verify the consistency of OBJECT_ENTITY.PERSON usage across the codebase.

✅ Verification successful

Let me gather more information about the constants definition since the previous results don't show the actual constant definition.


Constants import and usage is correctly implemented

The constants import is properly defined and the OBJECT_ENTITY.PERSON constant is consistently used across the codebase:

  • Defined as "person" in constants.mjs
  • Used correctly in API paths in clarify.app.mjs
  • Referenced properly in both the update-person action and new-person-instant source
🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify consistent usage of OBJECT_ENTITY.PERSON constant

# Search for OBJECT_ENTITY.PERSON usage
rg "OBJECT_ENTITY\.PERSON" -A 2

# Verify the constant definition
ast-grep --pattern 'OBJECT_ENTITY = {
  $$$
  PERSON: $_,
  $$$
}'

Length of output: 920


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check the constants definition file
cat components/clarify/common/constants.mjs

Length of output: 384


1-72: Verify consistency with other Clarify components

Let's ensure this implementation follows the same patterns as other Clarify components.

✅ Verification successful

Implementation is consistent with other Clarify components

The verification confirms that the implementation follows the established patterns across the Clarify integration:

  • Consistent component structure with proper key, name, description, version, and type
  • Proper usage of constants.OBJECT_ENTITY for entity types, matching other components
  • HTTP method implementation (patch) follows the same pattern as other API calls
  • Props structure with workspace and app matches other actions
🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for consistency across Clarify components

# Find all Clarify action components
fd -e mjs$ . components/clarify/actions -x cat {} \; | grep -A 5 "export default"

# Check for similar PATCH implementations
ast-grep --pattern 'patch({
  path: $_,
  $$$
})'

Length of output: 140


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to verify component consistency

# 1. Find all Clarify action files
echo "=== Clarify Action Files ==="
fd . components/clarify/actions -e mjs

# 2. Check implementation patterns
echo -e "\n=== Implementation Patterns ==="
rg "export default" components/clarify/actions -A 10

# 3. Check PATCH method usage
echo -e "\n=== PATCH Method Usage ==="
rg "patch\(" components/clarify/actions -A 5

# 4. Check constants usage
echo -e "\n=== Constants Usage ==="
rg "OBJECT_ENTITY" components/clarify -A 2

Length of output: 6460

components/clarify/actions/find-user/find-user.mjs (1)

1-79: Verify API integration details.

Please ensure that:

  1. The API endpoint /workspaces/${workspace}/users supports the implemented pagination
  2. The response structure matches the expected format (particularly the attributes structure)

key: "clarify-new-company-instant",
name: "New Company (Instant)",
description: "Emit new event when a new company is created. [See the documentation](https://api.getclarify.ai/swagger#/default/createWebhook).",
version: "0.0.1",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codebase verification

Version alignment needed with existing Clarify components

The new component is using version 0.0.1 while the existing Clarify component (@pipedream/clarify) is at version 0.1.0. Consider aligning the version with the existing component family to maintain consistency across the Clarify ecosystem.

🔗 Analysis chain

Version strategy check

Starting with version 0.0.1 is appropriate for a new component. However, ensure you have a versioning strategy in place for future updates.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check if there are existing Clarify components and their versions
fd --type f "package.json" components/clarify -x jq -r 'select(.version != null) | "\(.name): \(.version)"'

Length of output: 133

Comment on lines +21 to +27
generateMeta(resource) {
return {
id: resource._id,
summary: `New Company ${resource.name}`,
ts: Date.parse(resource._created_at),
};
},
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🛠️ Refactor suggestion

Add input validation and error handling to generateMeta

The current implementation might be susceptible to runtime errors if the resource object is malformed.

Consider implementing these improvements:

 generateMeta(resource) {
+  if (!resource || typeof resource !== 'object') {
+    throw new Error('Invalid resource object');
+  }
+  const { _id, name, _created_at } = resource;
+  if (!_id || !name || !_created_at) {
+    throw new Error('Missing required resource properties');
+  }
+  const timestamp = Date.parse(_created_at);
+  if (isNaN(timestamp)) {
+    throw new Error('Invalid creation date format');
+  }
   return {
-    id: resource._id,
-    summary: `New Company ${resource.name}`,
-    ts: Date.parse(resource._created_at),
+    id: _id,
+    summary: `New Company ${name}`,
+    ts: timestamp,
   };
 },
📝 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.

Suggested change
generateMeta(resource) {
return {
id: resource._id,
summary: `New Company ${resource.name}`,
ts: Date.parse(resource._created_at),
};
},
generateMeta(resource) {
if (!resource || typeof resource !== 'object') {
throw new Error('Invalid resource object');
}
const { _id, name, _created_at } = resource;
if (!_id || !name || !_created_at) {
throw new Error('Missing required resource properties');
}
const timestamp = Date.parse(_created_at);
if (isNaN(timestamp)) {
throw new Error('Invalid creation date format');
}
return {
id: _id,
summary: `New Company ${name}`,
ts: timestamp,
};
},

Comment on lines +14 to +29
methods: {
...common.methods,
getEntity() {
return constants.OBJECT_ENTITY.PERSON;
},
getEventType() {
return events.CREATE;
},
generateMeta(resource) {
return {
id: resource._id,
summary: `New Person ${resource.name.first_name}`,
ts: Date.parse(resource._created_at),
};
},
},
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚠️ Potential issue

Add data validation in generateMeta method

The method assumes resource.name.first_name will always exist. Consider adding validation to handle cases where the name object or its properties might be undefined.

     generateMeta(resource) {
+      if (!resource?._id) {
+        throw new Error("Resource ID is required");
+      }
+      const firstName = resource?.name?.first_name ?? "Unknown";
       return {
         id: resource._id,
-        summary: `New Person ${resource.name.first_name}`,
+        summary: `New Person ${firstName}`,
         ts: Date.parse(resource._created_at) || Date.now(),
       };
     },
📝 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.

Suggested change
methods: {
...common.methods,
getEntity() {
return constants.OBJECT_ENTITY.PERSON;
},
getEventType() {
return events.CREATE;
},
generateMeta(resource) {
return {
id: resource._id,
summary: `New Person ${resource.name.first_name}`,
ts: Date.parse(resource._created_at),
};
},
},
methods: {
...common.methods,
getEntity() {
return constants.OBJECT_ENTITY.PERSON;
},
getEventType() {
return events.CREATE;
},
generateMeta(resource) {
if (!resource?._id) {
throw new Error("Resource ID is required");
}
const firstName = resource?.name?.first_name ?? "Unknown";
return {
id: resource._id,
summary: `New Person ${firstName}`,
ts: Date.parse(resource._created_at) || Date.now(),
};
},
},

Comment on lines +1 to +4
import common from "../common/webhook.mjs";
import events from "../common/events.mjs";
import constants from "../../common/constants.mjs";
import sampleEmit from "./test-event.mjs";
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codebase verification

⚠️ Potential issue

Implementation type mismatch: Polling source is using webhook base

The implementation is incorrect. The file is importing webhook functionality (import common from "../common/webhook.mjs"), but based on the codebase patterns:

  • Polling sources should import from base-polling.mjs as seen in other polling implementations
  • The PR objectives specifically mention this should be a polling source

You need to:

  • Change the import from "../common/webhook.mjs" to "../common/base-polling.mjs"
  • Update the implementation to follow the polling pattern instead of webhook
🔗 Analysis chain

Verify implementation type: webhook vs polling

The PR objectives specify this should be a "Polling Source", but the implementation is using webhook functionality. This might not align with the requirements.

Let me verify the common implementation patterns in the codebase:


Let me check the implementation pattern of polling sources to verify if this is indeed a mismatch:


Let me try a different approach to check the implementation pattern:

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check if other polling sources follow a different pattern
fd -e mjs -e js . -x grep -l "type.*source" {} \; | xargs grep -l "polling"

Length of output: 13069


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check implementation pattern of polling sources
rg -A 5 "type.*polling" ./components/workamajig/sources/new-company/new-company.mjs

Length of output: 85


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Let's examine one of the polling sources we found earlier
cat ./components/workamajig/sources/new-company/new-company.mjs | head -n 10

# And also check what the common webhook.mjs contains
cat ./components/clarify/sources/common/webhook.mjs | head -n 10

Length of output: 699

Comment on lines +6 to +13
export default {
...common,
key: "clarify-company-added-to-list-instant",
name: "Company Added To List (Instant)",
description: "Emit new event when a company is added to a list. [See the documentation](https://api.getclarify.ai/swagger#/default/createWebhook)",
version: "0.0.1",
type: "source",
dedupe: "unique",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚠️ Potential issue

Implementation doesn't match PR objectives

There are two important discrepancies with the PR objectives:

  1. This is implemented as a webhook source, but the PR objectives specify it should be a "polling source"
  2. The required properties 'Company' and 'List' mentioned in the objectives are not defined in this implementation

Please clarify if this should be:

  1. Reimplemented as a polling source instead of extending the webhook module
  2. Updated to include the required properties 'Company' and 'List'

Comment on lines +92 to +94
async run({ body }) {
this.processResource(body);
},
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🛠️ Refactor suggestion

Add request validation to run handler

The run handler should validate the incoming webhook payload before processing.

Consider implementing:

 async run({ body }) {
+  if (!body) {
+    console.warn("Received empty webhook payload");
+    return;
+  }
+  // Verify webhook signature if available
+  // await this.verifyWebhookSignature(body);
   this.processResource(body);
 }

Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.

Comment on lines +18 to +39
async activate() {
const {
workspace,
createWebhook,
http: { endpoint: url },
setWebhookId,
getEntity,
getEventType,
} = this;

const response =
await createWebhook({
workspace,
data: {
url,
entity: getEntity(),
event_type: getEventType(),
},
});

setWebhookId(response.id);
},
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🛠️ Refactor suggestion

Add error handling for webhook creation

The activate hook should handle potential errors during webhook creation and validate required properties.

Consider implementing this improved version:

 async activate() {
   const {
     workspace,
     createWebhook,
     http: { endpoint: url },
     setWebhookId,
     getEntity,
     getEventType,
   } = this;
 
+  if (!workspace || !url) {
+    throw new ConfigurationError("Workspace and URL are required for webhook creation");
+  }
+
+  try {
     const response =
       await createWebhook({
         workspace,
         data: {
           url,
           entity: getEntity(),
           event_type: getEventType(),
         },
       });
 
     setWebhookId(response.id);
+  } catch (error) {
+    console.error("Failed to create webhook:", error);
+    throw error;
+  }
 }

Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.

Comment on lines +8 to +9
db: "$.service.db",
http: "$.interface.http",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codebase verification

Based on the review of the codebase, I can now provide the final response:

Webhook security measures need to be implemented

The current webhook implementation lacks essential security measures. The code review reveals:

  • No webhook signature validation
  • No request authentication mechanism
  • No IP allowlisting
  • No rate limiting

Key areas that need attention:

  • The webhook handler in components/clarify/sources/common/webhook.mjs processes incoming requests without any validation
  • The Clarify app (clarify.app.mjs) doesn't provide any webhook security methods
  • No security constants are defined in constants.mjs

Recommendations:

  1. Implement webhook signature validation using Clarify's webhook security mechanism (if provided by their API)
  2. Add request authentication
  3. Consider implementing IP allowlisting for Clarify's webhook IPs
  4. Add rate limiting to prevent abuse
🔗 Analysis chain

Verify webhook endpoint security measures

The component exposes an HTTP endpoint for receiving webhooks. Ensure that proper security measures are in place to validate incoming webhook requests from Clarify.

Let's check if there are any security validations in place:

Consider implementing:

  1. Webhook signature validation
  2. IP allowlisting
  3. Rate limiting

Also applies to: 22-23


Let me search for webhook validation implementation in the Clarify app and webhook handler.


Let me try a different approach to locate the Clarify app file and check webhook implementation.


Let me check the Clarify app implementation for any webhook security measures.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for webhook security implementations in the codebase
rg -g '!node_modules' -A 5 'webhook.*security|webhook.*auth|webhook.*valid' .

Length of output: 16624


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for webhook validation in Clarify app and webhook handler
rg -g '!node_modules' -A 10 'validateWebhook|verifyWebhook|webhook.*signature|webhook.*auth' components/clarify/

# Also check the app.mjs file for any webhook security methods
cat components/clarify/app.mjs

Length of output: 206


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Find the Clarify app file
fd -t f "clarify.*app.*" .

# Check webhook handler implementation
cat components/clarify/sources/common/webhook.mjs

# Search for any security-related code in Clarify components
rg -g '!node_modules' -A 5 'security|auth|valid|verify|hmac|signature' components/clarify/

Length of output: 4399


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check the full Clarify app implementation
cat components/clarify/clarify.app.mjs

# Check if there are any webhook security implementations in constants
cat components/clarify/common/constants.mjs

Length of output: 4509

Comment on lines +83 to +89
const { data = [] } = this.listPeople({
workspace,
params: {
offset,
limit: constants.DEFAULT_LIMIT,
},
});
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚠️ Potential issue

Add 'await' when calling async functions to retrieve data correctly

The listPeople method returns a Promise, so you need to use await to retrieve the data before destructuring it.

Apply this diff to fix the issue:

-        const { data = [] } = this.listPeople({
+        const { data = [] } = await this.listPeople({
📝 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.

Suggested change
const { data = [] } = this.listPeople({
workspace,
params: {
offset,
limit: constants.DEFAULT_LIMIT,
},
});
const { data = [] } = await this.listPeople({
workspace,
params: {
offset,
limit: constants.DEFAULT_LIMIT,
},
});

Comment on lines +48 to +54
const { data = [] } = this.listCompanies({
workspace,
params: {
offset,
limit: constants.DEFAULT_LIMIT,
},
});
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚠️ Potential issue

Add 'await' when calling async functions to retrieve data correctly

The listCompanies method returns a Promise, so you need to use await to retrieve the data before destructuring it. Without await, data will be undefined, causing errors when accessing its properties.

Apply this diff to fix the issue:

-        const { data = [] } = this.listCompanies({
+        const { data = [] } = await this.listCompanies({
📝 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.

Suggested change
const { data = [] } = this.listCompanies({
workspace,
params: {
offset,
limit: constants.DEFAULT_LIMIT,
},
});
const { data = [] } = await this.listCompanies({
workspace,
params: {
offset,
limit: constants.DEFAULT_LIMIT,
},
});

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
action New Action Request trigger / source New trigger / source request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Components] clarify
1 participant