Adding evals for natural language workflow building. #14417
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎ 3 Skipped Deployments
|
|
Note Currently processing new changes in this PR. This may take a few minutes, please wait... ⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
📒 Files selected for processing (65)
WalkthroughThis pull request introduces multiple JSON files that define evaluation tests for various automation workflows. Each file contains structured data representing queries, triggers, actions, and personas, which categorize the nature of the tasks. The tests cover a wide range of applications, including task management, messaging, and data synchronization across different platforms. Additionally, new environment configuration and a command-line tool for evaluating these tests against an API have been introduced. Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Tip CodeRabbit can enforce grammar and style rules using `languagetool`.Configure 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: 26
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (10)
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-graduated-corrected-filtered.json (1)
173-185: Consider adding intermediate steps and error handling for complex document processing workflow.This complex workflow involves multiple external API calls and services. Consider:
- Adding error handling steps between services
- Including retry logic for API calls
- Adding intermediate status updates
Consider breaking this into smaller, more manageable sub-workflows or adding checkpoint actions between major steps:
"actions": [ "openai-chat", + "status-checkpoint-content-analyzed", "notion-create-page-from-database", + "error-handler-notion", "linear-create-issue", + "status-checkpoint-tasks-created", "slack-send-message", "google_calendar-create-event" ],packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-ai-focus-filtered.json (1)
1-214: Consider architectural improvements for scalability and reliability.
Persona Implementation:
- Document the differences between "complex-workflow", "verbose", and "task-oriented" personas
- Define how these personas affect the AI's behavior
AI Service Dependencies:
- Consider implementing fallback options for OpenAI service
- Add rate limiting handling
- Cache common AI responses where applicable
Performance:
- Consider batching similar operations (e.g., multiple Slack messages)
- Implement retry mechanisms for external service calls
Would you like me to provide specific implementation examples for these improvements?
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-invalid-queries-filtered.json (1)
1-3: Consider adding metadata to improve test suite documentation.The test suite would benefit from additional metadata fields to provide context and documentation:
- Version information
- Description of what constitutes an "invalid query"
- Purpose and usage instructions
Add these fields at the root level:
{ + "version": "1.0.0", + "description": "Test suite for evaluating handling of invalid/vague natural language workflow queries", + "invalidQueryCriteria": [ + "Vague or ambiguous intentions", + "Missing specific triggers or actions", + "Incomplete workflow requirements" + ], "evaluationTests": [packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-no-components-filtered.json (1)
1-276: Add validation for bi-directional integration coverage.Many test cases test integration in one direction (e.g., "Snowflake to PowerBI") but lack tests for the reverse direction. Consider adding complementary test cases to ensure bi-directional integration testing where applicable.
For example, add reverse test cases:
- "Sync PowerBI dashboard data back to Snowflake"
- "Update Asana when Monday.com task status changes"
This ensures comprehensive coverage of integration scenarios.packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-101-150-verified-filtered.json (1)
1-455: LGTM: Comprehensive test coverage across different personasThe test suite effectively covers various scenarios:
- Multiple integration patterns (1:1, 1:many)
- Different user personas (succinct, verbose, sloppy)
- Various complexity levels (simple actions to multi-step workflows)
Consider adding test cases for:
- Error handling scenarios
- Rate limit handling
- Data validation workflows
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-151-200-verified-filtered.json (2)
222-228: Consider standardizing Google service naming patternsFor consistency across Google service integrations, consider standardizing the naming pattern. Currently, some use underscores (google_drive) while others might use different patterns.
284-292: Consider adding validation steps for complex workflowsFor complex workflows like Zoom recording transcription, consider adding intermediate validation steps to ensure:
- The recording file is accessible
- The file format is supported by OpenAI's transcription service
- Error handling for large file sizes
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-201-250-complex-filtered.json (2)
1-3: Consider adding metadata about the test suite.The JSON structure would benefit from additional metadata fields at the root level to provide context about this test suite, such as:
- version
- description
- category/complexity level
- total number of tests
{ + "version": "1.0.0", + "description": "Complex workflow evaluation tests (201-250)", + "category": "complex-filtered", + "totalTests": 50, "evaluationTests": [
48-54: Review intentional typos in "sloppy" persona test cases.While the "sloppy" persona test cases intentionally include typos to test system robustness, some might be too extreme and could affect evaluation accuracy:
- "analyize" → "analyze" (line 170)
- "updaet" → "update" (line 308)
- "genrate" → "generate" (line 475)
Consider maintaining a consistent level of "sloppiness" across test cases.
Also applies to: 170-178, 308-314, 357-363, 406-412, 475-481
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-0-100-filtered.json (1)
1-877: Consider adding complexity metrics.To improve the evaluation framework, consider adding complexity metrics for each test case:
- Number of steps in the workflow
- Data transformation requirements
- Error handling complexity
- Authentication requirements
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (9)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-0-100-filtered.json (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-101-150-verified-filtered.json (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-151-200-verified-filtered.json (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-201-250-complex-filtered.json (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-251-300-new-filtered.json (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-ai-focus-filtered.json (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-graduated-corrected-filtered.json (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-invalid-queries-filtered.json (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-no-components-filtered.json (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (13)
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-graduated-corrected-filtered.json (2)
1-187: LGTM: Well-structured evaluation test suite.The JSON structure is clean, consistent, and well-organized with a clear hierarchy.
89-93: LGTM: Well-defined invalid query test cases.The invalid query test cases like "make my team more productive" and "help me with reporting" are good examples of overly broad or vague requests that the system should identify as invalid.
Also applies to: 124-128
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-ai-focus-filtered.json (2)
1-214: LGTM: Well-structured evaluation test suite.The file follows a consistent and clean JSON structure with properly organized test cases.
4-13: Consider adding safety measures for sensitive operations.Several workflows handle sensitive customer data and make business-critical decisions:
- Zendesk ticket sentiment analysis (lines 4-13)
- Lead qualification from Typeform (lines 27-36)
- Churn risk analysis from Intercom (lines 101-110)
Consider adding:
- Human verification steps before updating critical systems
- Data privacy controls for AI processing
- Error handling and validation actions
Example enhancement for the Zendesk workflow:
{ "query": "When new support tickets come in through Zendesk, analyze sentiment with GPT and prioritize in Linear based on urgency", "triggers": ["zendesk-new-ticket"], "actions": [ "openai-chat", - "linear-create-issue" + "slack-send-message", + "linear-create-issue-with-approval" ], "persona": "complex-workflow" }Also applies to: 27-36, 101-110
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-no-components-filtered.json (2)
1-276: Verify component naming consistency.Some component names use different separator styles:
apollo_io-create-contactuses underscore and hyphenmonday-create-itemuses only hyphenLet's verify the naming convention across all components.
#!/bin/bash # Extract all component names and check for consistent naming patterns rg -o '"triggers":\s*\[(.*?)\]|"actions":\s*\[(.*?)\]' -g '*.json' packages/evals/ | \ grep -o '"[^"]*"' | sort | uniq
1-276: Verify JSON schema validation.The file structure appears to be consistent, but it would be beneficial to validate it against a schema to ensure all test cases follow the required format.
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more specific information about the JSON structure and schema validation.
Let me try one more verification with simpler commands to check the JSON structure.
JSON structure validation successful - no schema issues found
The verification results show that the JSON file is well-structured and consistent:
- All 41 test cases have the required fields (query, triggers, actions, and persona)
- 7 test cases have defined triggers and 6 have defined actions
- The empty arrays for triggers and actions in other test cases are intentional, representing scenarios where components are yet to be mapped
- All trigger and action components referenced are properly formatted and consistent
The original review comment's concern about schema validation is addressed, as the file demonstrates consistent structure and formatting throughout.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check if a JSON schema exists for this test suite fd -e json -p "packages/evals/**/schema.json" # Verify consistent formatting across all eval test suites fd -e json -p "packages/evals/**/eval-test-suite.*filtered.json" --exec jq -r 'keys' {} \;Length of output: 233
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check the structure of all evaluation test suite files fd -e json -p "packages/evals/**/eval-test-suite.*filtered.json" --exec jq -r ' .evaluationTests | reduce .[] as $test ({ total_tests: 0, with_triggers: 0, with_actions: 0, unique_personas: {}, trigger_types: {}, action_types: {} }; .total_tests += 1 | .with_triggers += (if ($test.triggers | length) > 0 then 1 else 0 end) | .with_actions += (if ($test.actions | length) > 0 then 1 else 0 end) | .unique_personas[$test.persona] += 1 | reduce ($test.triggers[] // empty) as $t (.trigger_types[$t] += 1; .) | reduce ($test.actions[] // empty) as $a (.action_types[$a] += 1; .) )' {} \; # Validate JSON structure consistency fd -e json -p "packages/evals/**/eval-test-suite.*filtered.json" --exec jq -r ' .evaluationTests[] | select( (has("query") | not) or (has("triggers") | not) or (has("actions") | not) or (has("persona") | not) )' {} \;Length of output: 881
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check basic structure and counts jq -r '{ total_tests: .evaluationTests | length, tests_with_triggers: [.evaluationTests[] | select(.triggers | length > 0)] | length, tests_with_actions: [.evaluationTests[] | select(.actions | length > 0)] | length, all_fields_present: [.evaluationTests[] | select(has("query") and has("triggers") and has("actions") and has("persona"))] | length }' packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-no-components-filtered.json # List unique triggers and actions echo "Unique triggers:" jq -r '.evaluationTests[].triggers[]' packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-no-components-filtered.json | sort -u echo -e "\nUnique actions:" jq -r '.evaluationTests[].actions[]' packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-no-components-filtered.json | sort -uLength of output: 1114
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-101-150-verified-filtered.json (2)
1-2: LGTM: Well-structured JSON formatThe file follows proper JSON structure with appropriate nesting and formatting.
Also applies to: 454-455
434-443: Security consideration: Data handling in multi-service workflowThis workflow processes form responses through GPT and stores them in Airtable. Consider adding data sanitization steps and implementing proper error handling for sensitive information.
Consider implementing the following safeguards:
- Add data validation before GPT processing
- Implement PII detection and redaction
- Add error handling for failed GPT analysis
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-151-200-verified-filtered.json (2)
1-466: LGTM: Well-structured JSON formatThe file follows proper JSON formatting with consistent structure and indentation.
1-466: Verify comprehensive service integration coverageLet's ensure this test suite covers all supported integration services.
✅ Verification successful
Let me generate another script to check for any potential service definitions in the codebase that might not be covered in the test suite.
Based on the comprehensive results from both scripts, I can now generate the final response.
Test suite provides good service coverage with room for expansion
The test suite (151-200) includes 21 popular services and covers diverse integration patterns. However, there are additional services in the codebase that could be included in future test suites:
- Enterprise services: ServiceNow, Jira Service Desk, FreshService
- Communication platforms: Twilio
- Developer tools: Adobe PDF Services, Azure services
- Business tools: QuickBooks, Extensiv, Splynx
The current test suite adequately covers the most commonly used services (Google Workspace, Slack, Discord, etc.) and their primary integration patterns. The variations in personas (complex-workflow, succinct, verbose, etc.) help test different query styles.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Extract unique services from the test suite and compare with supported services # Extract unique services from triggers and actions echo "Extracting unique services from current test suite..." jq -r '.evaluationTests[] | (.triggers[], .actions[]) | split("-")[0] | select(length > 0)' packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-151-200-verified-filtered.json | sort -u # Look for potential missing services in other test files echo "Checking for additional services in other test files..." fd -e json -e yaml . | xargs jq -r 'if has("components") then .components[] | select(.type=="action" or .type=="trigger") | .key | split("-")[0] else empty end' 2>/dev/null | sort -uLength of output: 796
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for service-related files and definitions in the codebase echo "Searching for service definitions in the codebase..." # Look for service definitions in common locations echo "=== Service files ===" fd -t f "(service|integration|connector)" # Look for potential service imports or definitions in code echo -e "\n=== Service patterns in code ===" rg -i "service|integration|connector" -g "!{test,dist,build}/*" -g "*.{ts,js,json,yaml,yml}" -l # Look specifically for OAuth configurations which often indicate supported services echo -e "\n=== OAuth configurations ===" rg -i "oauth" -g "*.{json,yaml,yml,ts,js}" -lLength of output: 8564
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-251-300-new-filtered.json (2)
1-461: LGTM: Well-structured evaluation test suiteThe JSON structure is consistent and well-organized, with clear separation of test cases and standardized fields.
247-256: Consider rate limits and processing constraintsThe following test cases involve resource-intensive operations that might require additional considerations:
WhatsApp message analysis with GPT (lines 247-256):
- Consider GPT API rate limits
- Add error handling for API failures
- Consider message size limits
RingCentral recording transcription (lines 399-407):
- Consider file size limits for call recordings
- Add handling for long processing times
- Consider implementing retry logic for failed transcriptions
Let's check if there are any existing rate limit handlers or error recovery patterns in the codebase:
Also applies to: 399-407
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-0-100-filtered.json (1)
1-877: JSON structure validation passed.The JSON structure is well-formed and follows a consistent schema for test cases.
| "query": "When customer reaches usage threshold in Stripe, check status in ChargeBee, update account in HubSpot, and trigger customer success workflow", | ||
| "triggers": [ | ||
| "stripe-subscription-updated" | ||
| ], | ||
| "actions": [ | ||
| "hubspot-create-or-update-contact" | ||
| ], | ||
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Incomplete workflow definition for usage threshold monitoring.
The query mentions checking status in ChargeBee and triggering customer success workflow, but these actions are not reflected in the actions array. Consider adding:
- ChargeBee status check action
- Customer success workflow trigger action
"actions": [
"hubspot-create-or-update-contact"
+ "chargebee-get-subscription",
+ "customer-success-workflow-trigger"
],Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
| "query": "When customer submits form in AirKit, create contact in HubSpot", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [ | ||
| "hubspot-create-or-update-contact" | ||
| ], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Based on the search results, I can now provide a final response:
Test case has incorrect persona classification and references unsupported integration
The test case requires correction for two reasons:
- AirKit appears only once in the entire test suite and there's no evidence of it being a supported integration (no component files or other references found)
- The "no-component" persona is incorrectly used here, as HubSpot is clearly a supported integration with multiple occurrences across test files:
hubspot-create-or-update-contactis a valid action used consistently in many workflows- HubSpot has other valid components like
hubspot-deal-updatedandhubspot-new-contact - Similar test cases using HubSpot actions are correctly classified as "task-oriented" or "complex-workflow"
🔗 Analysis chain
Verify component availability and persona classification.
This test case is marked as "no-component" but includes a valid HubSpot action. Additionally, "AirKit" might need verification as a supported integration.
Let me try a different search strategy to verify the components and their existence.
This script will:
- Search for any HubSpot related patterns in JSON files
- Search for AirKit related patterns in JSON files
- Specifically look for the action "hubspot-create-or-update-contact" to verify its definition
The results will help us understand if these components are properly defined in the system and validate the persona classification.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if AirKit is a supported integration
fd --type f "airkit" packages/
# Verify HubSpot component existence
fd --type f "hubspot" packages/
Length of output: 62
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for HubSpot related files and patterns using ripgrep
echo "=== Searching for HubSpot patterns ==="
rg -i "hubspot" --type json packages/ -A 2
echo -e "\n=== Searching for AirKit patterns ==="
rg -i "airkit" --type json packages/ -A 2
echo -e "\n=== Looking for component definitions ==="
rg "hubspot-create-or-update-contact" packages/ -A 2
Length of output: 16786
| "query": "Analyze customer feedback from Delighted with AI and update account health in Salesforce", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [ | ||
| "openai-chat", | ||
| "salesforce_rest_api-update-contact" | ||
| ], | ||
| "persona": "task-oriented" | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add missing triggers for event-driven workflows.
Several test cases have empty trigger arrays despite describing event-driven scenarios:
- Delighted customer feedback analysis (lines 60-67)
- GitHub issues analysis (lines 81-88)
- Canny feature requests categorization (lines 123-130)
- Help Scout conversations analysis (lines 164-171)
- Salesforce deal closure handling (lines 195-202)
Consider adding appropriate triggers:
{
"query": "Analyze customer feedback from Delighted with AI and update account health in Salesforce",
- "triggers": [],
+ "triggers": ["delighted-new-response"],
...
}Would you like me to suggest specific triggers for each case?
Also applies to: 81-88, 123-130, 164-171, 195-202
| "query": "sync my data between systems", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "invalid-query" | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Enhance test cases with expected error types and categories.
The current test cases focus primarily on vague queries but could be more comprehensive:
- Add specific error types to help validate error handling
- Include expected error messages
- Categorize queries by their invalidity type
Enhance the test case structure:
{
"query": "sync my data between systems",
+ "category": "vague_integration",
+ "expectedErrorType": "INSUFFICIENT_CONTEXT",
+ "expectedErrorMessage": "Please specify the systems to sync and the data type",
"triggers": [],
"actions": [],
"persona": "invalid-query"
},Also applies to: 10-14, 16-20
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "invalid-query" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "update my database", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "invalid-query" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "automate customer onboarding", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "invalid-query" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "sync team communications", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "invalid-query" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "manage project resources", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "invalid-query" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "track sales performance", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "invalid-query" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "automate data entry", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "invalid-query" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "generate reports weekly", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "invalid-query" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "manage my workflows", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "invalid-query" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "integrate payment processing", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "invalid-query" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "automate file transfers", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "invalid-query" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "sync my documents", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "invalid-query" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "manage customer relationships", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "invalid-query" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "track employee performance", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "invalid-query" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "automate marketing campaigns", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "invalid-query" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "manage my leads", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "invalid-query" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "sync my apps", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "invalid-query" | ||
| } | ||
| ] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Expand test coverage for edge cases and error conditions.
While the current test suite covers vague queries well, it's missing critical test cases for:
- Malformed queries (e.g., invalid characters, extremely long text)
- Empty or whitespace-only queries
- Queries with special characters or SQL/code injection attempts
- Queries in different languages
Would you like me to help generate additional test cases for these scenarios? Here's an example of what could be added:
{
"query": "",
"category": "empty_input",
"expectedErrorType": "EMPTY_QUERY",
"expectedErrorMessage": "Query cannot be empty",
"triggers": [],
"actions": [],
"persona": "invalid-query"
},
{
"query": " ",
"category": "whitespace_only",
"expectedErrorType": "EMPTY_QUERY",
"expectedErrorMessage": "Query cannot be whitespace only",
"triggers": [],
"actions": [],
"persona": "invalid-query"
},
{
"query": "SELECT * FROM users; DROP TABLE users;",
"category": "injection_attempt",
"expectedErrorType": "INVALID_CHARACTERS",
"expectedErrorMessage": "Query contains invalid or dangerous characters",
"triggers": [],
"actions": [],
"persona": "invalid-query"
}| "query": "When someone stars our GitHub repo, send a thank you email with GPT", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [ | ||
| "openai-chat", | ||
| "gmail-send-email" | ||
| ], | ||
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Missing GitHub trigger for repository star event.
The test case for responding to GitHub stars is missing the appropriate trigger.
Apply this diff to add the missing trigger:
"query": "When someone stars our GitHub repo, send a thank you email with GPT",
"triggers": [
+ "github-new-star"
],
"actions": [
"openai-chat",
"gmail-send-email"
],📝 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.
| "query": "When someone stars our GitHub repo, send a thank you email with GPT", | |
| "triggers": [], | |
| "actions": [ | |
| "openai-chat", | |
| "gmail-send-email" | |
| ], | |
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | |
| }, | |
| "query": "When someone stars our GitHub repo, send a thank you email with GPT", | |
| "triggers": [ | |
| "github-new-star" | |
| ], | |
| "actions": [ | |
| "openai-chat", | |
| "gmail-send-email" | |
| ], | |
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | |
| }, |
| "query": "create new page in Confluence", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [ | ||
| "onenote-create-page" | ||
| ], | ||
| "persona": "succinct" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Mismatched action for Confluence page creation.
The test case specifies creating a page in Confluence but uses OneNote's action instead.
Apply this diff to fix the action:
"query": "create new page in Confluence",
"triggers": [],
"actions": [
- "onenote-create-page"
+ "confluence-create-page"
],
"persona": "succinct"📝 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.
| "query": "create new page in Confluence", | |
| "triggers": [], | |
| "actions": [ | |
| "onenote-create-page" | |
| ], | |
| "persona": "succinct" | |
| "query": "create new page in Confluence", | |
| "triggers": [], | |
| "actions": [ | |
| "confluence-create-page" | |
| ], | |
| "persona": "succinct" |
| "query": "When an opportunity changes in Salesforce, update the record in HubSpot", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [ | ||
| "hubspot-create-or-update-contact" | ||
| ], | ||
| "persona": "complex-workflow" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Missing trigger for Salesforce opportunity change.
The test case for syncing Salesforce opportunity changes to HubSpot is missing the appropriate trigger.
Apply this diff to add the missing trigger:
"query": "When an opportunity changes in Salesforce, update the record in HubSpot",
"triggers": [
+ "salesforce_rest_api-opportunity-updated"
],
"actions": [
"hubspot-create-or-update-contact"
],📝 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.
| "query": "When an opportunity changes in Salesforce, update the record in HubSpot", | |
| "triggers": [], | |
| "actions": [ | |
| "hubspot-create-or-update-contact" | |
| ], | |
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | |
| "query": "When an opportunity changes in Salesforce, update the record in HubSpot", | |
| "triggers": [ | |
| "salesforce_rest_api-opportunity-updated" | |
| ], | |
| "actions": [ | |
| "hubspot-create-or-update-contact" | |
| ], | |
| "persona": "complex-workflow" |
| "query": "I want new Shopify orders to be automatically processed in NetSuite", | ||
| "triggers": [ | ||
| "shopify_developer_app-new-order-created" | ||
| ], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "verbose" | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Missing NetSuite action for Shopify order processing.
The test case for processing Shopify orders in NetSuite is missing the corresponding NetSuite action.
Apply this diff to add the missing action:
"query": "I want new Shopify orders to be automatically processed in NetSuite",
"triggers": [
"shopify_developer_app-new-order-created"
],
"actions": [
+ "netsuite-create-sales-order"
],
"persona": "verbose"📝 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.
| "query": "I want new Shopify orders to be automatically processed in NetSuite", | |
| "triggers": [ | |
| "shopify_developer_app-new-order-created" | |
| ], | |
| "actions": [], | |
| "persona": "verbose" | |
| }, | |
| "query": "I want new Shopify orders to be automatically processed in NetSuite", | |
| "triggers": [ | |
| "shopify_developer_app-new-order-created" | |
| ], | |
| "actions": [ | |
| "netsuite-create-sales-order" | |
| ], | |
| "persona": "verbose" | |
| }, |
| "query": "When customer feedback arrives in Delighted, analyze sentiment with AI and update Salesforce", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [ | ||
| "openai-chat", | ||
| "salesforce_rest_api-update-contact" | ||
| ], | ||
| "persona": "complex-workflow" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Missing trigger for customer feedback workflow.
The test case for analyzing customer feedback from Delighted is missing the appropriate trigger. This could lead to incomplete testing of the workflow.
Apply this diff to add the missing trigger:
"query": "When customer feedback arrives in Delighted, analyze sentiment with AI and update Salesforce",
"triggers": [
+ "delighted-new-response"
],
"actions": [
"openai-chat",
"salesforce_rest_api-update-contact"
],📝 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.
| "query": "When customer feedback arrives in Delighted, analyze sentiment with AI and update Salesforce", | |
| "triggers": [], | |
| "actions": [ | |
| "openai-chat", | |
| "salesforce_rest_api-update-contact" | |
| ], | |
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | |
| "query": "When customer feedback arrives in Delighted, analyze sentiment with AI and update Salesforce", | |
| "triggers": [ | |
| "delighted-new-response" | |
| ], | |
| "actions": [ | |
| "openai-chat", | |
| "salesforce_rest_api-update-contact" | |
| ], | |
| "persona": "complex-workflow" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 6
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (2)
packages/evals/component_retrieval/package-lock.jsonis excluded by!**/package-lock.jsonpnpm-lock.yamlis excluded by!**/pnpm-lock.yaml
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/.env.example (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/.gitignore (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/evaluator.mjs (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/package.json (1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (3)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/.env.example
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/.gitignore
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/package.json
| for (const file of evalFiles) { | ||
| const filePath = path.resolve(file); | ||
| await processEvalFile(filePath); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Process evaluation files concurrently to improve performance
Currently, evaluation files are processed sequentially, which can be slow with multiple files. Processing them concurrently can enhance performance.
Apply this diff to process files concurrently:
-for (const file of evalFiles) {
- const filePath = path.resolve(file);
- await processEvalFile(filePath);
-}
+await Promise.all(
+ evalFiles.map(async (file) => {
+ const filePath = path.resolve(file);
+ await processEvalFile(filePath);
+ })
+);📝 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.
| for (const file of evalFiles) { | |
| const filePath = path.resolve(file); | |
| await processEvalFile(filePath); | |
| } | |
| await Promise.all( | |
| evalFiles.map(async (file) => { | |
| const filePath = path.resolve(file); | |
| await processEvalFile(filePath); | |
| }) | |
| ); |
| let totalEvals = 0; | ||
| let totalSuccesses = 0; | ||
|
|
||
| const apiHost = process.env.API_BASE_URL || "https://api.pipedream.com"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add a check for the required API key
To prevent runtime errors when PIPEDREAM_API_KEY is not set, add a check to ensure that the environment variable is provided before making API requests.
Apply this diff to handle missing API key:
const apiHost = process.env.API_BASE_URL || "https://api.pipedream.com";
+if (!process.env.PIPEDREAM_API_KEY) {
+ console.error("Please set the PIPEDREAM_API_KEY environment variable.");
+ process.exit(1);
+}📝 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.
| const apiHost = process.env.API_BASE_URL || "https://api.pipedream.com"; | |
| const apiHost = process.env.API_BASE_URL || "https://api.pipedream.com"; | |
| if (!process.env.PIPEDREAM_API_KEY) { | |
| console.error("Please set the PIPEDREAM_API_KEY environment variable."); | |
| process.exit(1); | |
| } |
| const response = await fetch(apiUrl, { | ||
| headers: { | ||
| "Content-Type": "application/json", | ||
| "Authorization": `Bearer ${process.env.PIPEDREAM_API_KEY}`, | ||
| }, | ||
| }); | ||
| const apiData = await response.json(); | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Handle HTTP errors when fetching API data
Currently, the script does not check the HTTP response status after fetching from the API. If the response is not successful, calling response.json() may result in unexpected errors. It's important to check response.ok and handle errors appropriately.
Apply this diff to handle HTTP errors:
const response = await fetch(apiUrl, {
headers: {
"Content-Type": "application/json",
"Authorization": `Bearer ${process.env.PIPEDREAM_API_KEY}`,
},
});
+if (!response.ok) {
+ console.error(`API request failed with status ${response.status}: ${response.statusText}`);
+ continue;
+}
const apiData = await response.json();Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
| console.log(`${RED_CROSS} Failure for query: "${query}"`); | ||
| console.log("Differences:"); | ||
| console.log(customDiff({ | ||
| triggers, | ||
| actions, | ||
| }, apiData)); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Display differences between expected and actual triggers and actions only
When displaying differences upon failure, comparing the expected triggers and actions with the entire apiData can lead to noisy outputs. Focus on the relevant fields to make the diffs clearer.
Apply this diff to compare only the relevant fields:
console.log(`${RED_CROSS} Failure for query: "${query}"`);
console.log("Differences:");
console.log(customDiff(
- { triggers, actions },
- apiData
+ { triggers, actions },
+ { triggers: apiTriggers, actions: apiActions }
));Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
| const successRate = ((totalSuccesses / totalEvals) * 100).toFixed(2); | ||
| console.log(`\nTotal Evals: ${totalEvals}`); | ||
| console.log(`Total Successes: ${totalSuccesses}`); | ||
| console.log(`Success Rate: ${successRate}%`); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Calculate success rate only if there are evaluations
Ensure that the success rate calculation handles division by zero when totalEvals is zero.
Apply this diff to handle zero evaluations:
const successRate = ((totalSuccesses / totalEvals) * 100).toFixed(2);
+const displaySuccessRate = isNaN(successRate) ? 'N/A' : `${successRate}%`;
console.log(`\nTotal Evals: ${totalEvals}`);
console.log(`Total Successes: ${totalSuccesses}`);
-console.log(`Success Rate: ${successRate}%`);
+console.log(`Success Rate: ${displaySuccessRate}`);📝 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.
| const successRate = ((totalSuccesses / totalEvals) * 100).toFixed(2); | |
| console.log(`\nTotal Evals: ${totalEvals}`); | |
| console.log(`Total Successes: ${totalSuccesses}`); | |
| console.log(`Success Rate: ${successRate}%`); | |
| const successRate = ((totalSuccesses / totalEvals) * 100).toFixed(2); | |
| const displaySuccessRate = isNaN(successRate) ? 'N/A' : `${successRate}%`; | |
| console.log(`\nTotal Evals: ${totalEvals}`); | |
| console.log(`Total Successes: ${totalSuccesses}`); | |
| console.log(`Success Rate: ${displaySuccessRate}`); |
| JSON.stringify(apiTriggers.sort()) === JSON.stringify(triggers.sort()); | ||
| const actionsMatch = | ||
| JSON.stringify(apiActions.sort()) === JSON.stringify(actions.sort()); | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Use deep comparison for triggers and actions
Comparing arrays using JSON.stringify() may not reliably detect differences in content, especially if the arrays contain objects or the order varies. Consider using a deep equality check to compare the arrays.
Apply this diff to use deep equality comparison:
const triggersMatch =
- JSON.stringify(apiTriggers.sort()) === JSON.stringify(triggers.sort());
+ arraysEqual(apiTriggers, triggers);
const actionsMatch =
- JSON.stringify(apiActions.sort()) === JSON.stringify(actions.sort());
+ arraysEqual(apiActions, actions);
+function arraysEqual(a, b) {
+ if (a.length !== b.length) return false;
+ const sortedA = [...a].sort();
+ const sortedB = [...b].sort();
+ return sortedA.every((value, index) => value === sortedB[index]);
+}Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 16
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-no-components-filtered.json (1)
1-2: Consider adding JSON schema validation.To ensure data consistency and catch potential issues early, consider adding a JSON schema that defines:
- Required fields
- Field types and formats
- Allowed values (e.g., valid trigger/action names)
- Array constraints
Would you like me to help create a JSON schema for this test suite?
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-151-200-verified-filtered.json (1)
284-291: Consider rate limiting for OpenAI-integrated workflowsSeveral test cases integrate with OpenAI for analysis and transcription. These should be implemented with appropriate rate limiting and error handling to manage API usage and costs effectively.
Affected workflows:
- Zoom recording transcription
- Airtable record classification
- RSS feed content analysis
Also applies to: 338-346, 438-446
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-similar-apps-filtered.json (1)
1-707: Consider adding error handling scenariosThe test suite covers a wide range of happy path scenarios but could benefit from including error cases such as:
- Rate limit handling
- Authentication failures
- API downtime scenarios
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-0-100-filtered.json (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-151-200-verified-filtered.json (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-no-components-filtered.json (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-similar-apps-filtered.json (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (7)
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-no-components-filtered.json (1)
4-42: Previous review comment about inconsistent component coverage still applies.packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-151-200-verified-filtered.json (3)
1-466: LGTM: Well-structured JSON formatThe file follows proper JSON structure with consistent formatting and organization.
2-464: Well-designed test coverage across different personas and scenariosThe test suite effectively covers:
- Different writing styles (succinct, verbose, sloppy)
- Various complexity levels (simple actions vs multi-step workflows)
- Error cases (typos, informal language)
367-374: Verify shared resource access permissionsTest cases involving shared resources (Google Drive, Sheets) should ensure proper permission handling:
- Changes to specific files in shared drive
- New worksheet notifications
Also applies to: 457-464
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-similar-apps-filtered.json (2)
1-707: LGTM: Well-structured evaluation test suiteThe JSON structure is well-formed with consistent formatting and all required fields (query, triggers, actions, persona) present in each test case.
601-608: Verify trigger-action consistencyThe trigger
google_calendar-event-cancelledmight not be the most appropriate for this workflow. Consider usinggoogle_calendar-event-endedorgoogle_calendar-event-finishedto better match the intended behavior of updating Outlook Calendar when a Google Calendar event ends.packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-0-100-filtered.json (1)
1-877: LGTM! The overall structure and format of the evaluation test suite is well-organized.The JSON structure effectively captures various natural language workflow scenarios with clear mapping between queries, triggers, and actions.
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When new user signs up in Mixpanel, create profile in Pendo", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "Add new 6sense accounts to RollWorks", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When new survey response in Qualtrics, add to Gainsight", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "Create tasks in Wrike from Clubhouse stories", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When customer submits proof in Filestage, add to Bynder", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "Create Qatalog process from new Notion template", | ||
| "triggers": [ | ||
| "notion-new-page" | ||
| ], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When user requests access in Mesh Directory, create ticket in Jira Service Management", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "Add new candidates from SmartRecruiters to Workday", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When new post is created in Discourse, share on Yammer", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "Create monday.com pulse from Range check-in", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [ | ||
| "monday-create-item" | ||
| ], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When new task is created in Process Street, add to Teamwork", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "Add new Demodesk recordings to Gong", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When new article is published on Dev.to, cross-post to Hashnode", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "Create UserPilot experience from new Pendo guide", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When new document is uploaded to Box, scan with Nightfall", | ||
| "triggers": [ | ||
| "box-new-file" | ||
| ], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| } | ||
| ] | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider categorizing test cases by pattern.
Several test cases follow common patterns that could be categorized for better organization and coverage analysis:
- Content synchronization (e.g., "Create Lucidchart diagram from Miro board")
- Access management (e.g., "When employee is terminated in Namely, revoke access in Rippling")
- Cross-posting (e.g., "When new article is published on Dev.to, cross-post to Hashnode")
This categorization would help:
- Ensure comprehensive coverage of common use cases
- Identify gaps in test coverage
- Facilitate maintenance and updates
Would you like me to help create a categorization scheme and reorganize the test cases?
| { | ||
| "query": "Add rowing sessions from Hydrow to my Apple Health", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When someone mentions us on Blind, send to Discord", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [ | ||
| "discord-send-message" | ||
| ], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "Create tasks in Monday.com from Shortcut stories", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [ | ||
| "monday-create-item" | ||
| ], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When a new invoice is created in NetSuite, sync to Sage Intacct", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "Create Lattice goals from Asana projects", | ||
| "triggers": [ | ||
| "asana-new-project" | ||
| ], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When new candidate appears in Lever, create user in JumpCloud", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "Add new LeanIX components to our Architecture Handbook in Confluence", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When a deal closes in Close.com, create project in TeamGantt", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "Create Coda doc from new Pitch presentation", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [ | ||
| "coda-create-rows" | ||
| ], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When contract is approved in Ironclad, create workspace in Retool", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "Add new Gong snippets to Chorus.ai library", | ||
| "triggers": [ | ||
| "gong-new-call" | ||
| ], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When employee is terminated in Namely, revoke access in Rippling", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "Sync product specs from Productboard to Aha!", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "Create Metabase dashboard when new Amplitude cohort is created", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When new report runs in Looker, send to Tableau", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "no-component" | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Based on the verification results, I can now generate the final response:
Test cases reference unavailable platform integrations
The test suite includes several platform integrations that are not currently implemented in the codebase:
- None of the triggers/actions mentioned in the test cases (
apollo_io-create-contact,asana-new-project,gong-new-call, etc.) were found in the components directory - Only three components appear to be implemented: Microsoft OneDrive, Imgur, and Extensiv Integration Manager
- Many platforms referenced in the test queries (Auth0, PowerBI, ServiceNow, etc.) lack corresponding component implementations
Recommendations:
- Remove or mark as "future" the test cases that reference unimplemented integrations
- Focus test cases on the actually implemented components (OneDrive, Imgur, Extensiv)
- Consider maintaining a separate test suite for planned/future integrations
🔗 Analysis chain
Verify platform integration availability.
Several test cases reference platforms that may not be integrated with the system. For example:
- Auth0 integration (line 44)
- PowerBI integration (line 50)
- ServiceNow integration (line 56)
Consider:
- Verifying which platforms are actually available for integration
- Prioritizing test cases based on platform availability
- Adding a comment for unavailable platforms to track integration requests
Let me generate additional verification to check for actual component integrations, as the previous script only searched for filenames:
This will help us verify if the mentioned triggers and actions in the test file have corresponding component implementations.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check which platforms mentioned in the test cases are available in the codebase
# Extract unique platform names from queries
echo "Extracting platform names from queries..."
cat packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-no-components-filtered.json | \
jq -r '.evaluationTests[].query' | \
tr ' ' '\n' | \
grep -v '^[[:lower:]]\|^[[:digit:]]\|^$\|^to$\|^in$\|^from$\|^when$\|^is$\|^new$' | \
sort -u > /tmp/platforms.txt
# Search for each platform in the codebase
echo "Checking platform availability in components..."
while read platform; do
echo "Platform: $platform"
fd -t f "^$platform" components/ || echo "Not found: $platform"
done < /tmp/platforms.txt
Length of output: 9137
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for actual component definitions/integrations in the codebase
echo "Checking for component definitions..."
# Check for component definitions in common locations
rg -l "component|integration|connector" --type json components/ || echo "No component definitions found"
# Check triggers/actions specifically mentioned in the test file
echo -e "\nChecking specific triggers/actions from test file:"
jq -r '.evaluationTests[] | select(.triggers != [] or .actions != []) | (.triggers[], .actions[])' packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-no-components-filtered.json | sort -u | while read -r component; do
echo "Looking for: $component"
rg "$component" --type json components/
done
Length of output: 2346
| "query": "I want to track my liked tweets in a spreadsheet", | ||
| "triggers": [ | ||
| "twitter-my-tweets" | ||
| ], | ||
| "actions": [ | ||
| "google_sheets-add-single-row" | ||
| ], | ||
| "persona": "verbose" | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fix incorrect trigger for liked tweets workflow
The test case uses twitter-my-tweets trigger for tracking liked tweets, which doesn't match the user's intent. This should use a trigger specific to liked tweets.
Apply this fix:
{
"query": "I want to track my liked tweets in a spreadsheet",
"triggers": [
- "twitter-my-tweets"
+ "twitter-new-liked-tweet"
],
"actions": [
"google_sheets-add-single-row"
],
"persona": "verbose"
}📝 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.
| "query": "I want to track my liked tweets in a spreadsheet", | |
| "triggers": [ | |
| "twitter-my-tweets" | |
| ], | |
| "actions": [ | |
| "google_sheets-add-single-row" | |
| ], | |
| "persona": "verbose" | |
| }, | |
| "query": "I want to track my liked tweets in a spreadsheet", | |
| "triggers": [ | |
| "twitter-new-liked-tweet" | |
| ], | |
| "actions": [ | |
| "google_sheets-add-single-row" | |
| ], | |
| "persona": "verbose" | |
| }, |
| "query": "add new row in google spreadsheet", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [ | ||
| "google_sheets-add-single-row" | ||
| ], | ||
| "persona": "similar-app" | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Remove duplicate test cases
Several test cases are exact duplicates of earlier entries. For example:
- "add new row in google spreadsheet" (first occurrence: lines 4-10)
- "When someone books through Calendly, add event to Google Calendar" (first occurrence: lines 12-20)
Duplicate test cases may skew evaluation results and should be removed.
Also applies to: 245-253
| "query": "When someone books through TidyCal, add to Calendly availability", | ||
| "triggers": [ | ||
| "tidycal-new-appointment-booked" | ||
| ], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "similar-app" | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add missing actions for TidyCal-Calendly integration
The test case has a trigger but no corresponding actions, which makes it incomplete. Consider adding appropriate Calendly actions to complete the workflow.
| "query": "I want to automatically catalog all my Loom videos in Notion", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [ | ||
| "notion-create-page-from-database" | ||
| ], | ||
| "persona": "verbose" | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Missing Loom trigger for video catalog automation.
The test case for cataloging Loom videos in Notion is missing the trigger for new video uploads.
Apply this diff to add the missing trigger:
"query": "I want to automatically catalog all my Loom videos in Notion",
"triggers": [
+ "loom-new-video"
],
"actions": [
"notion-create-page-from-database"
],📝 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.
| "query": "I want to automatically catalog all my Loom videos in Notion", | |
| "triggers": [], | |
| "actions": [ | |
| "notion-create-page-from-database" | |
| ], | |
| "persona": "verbose" | |
| }, | |
| "query": "I want to automatically catalog all my Loom videos in Notion", | |
| "triggers": [ | |
| "loom-new-video" | |
| ], | |
| "actions": [ | |
| "notion-create-page-from-database" | |
| ], | |
| "persona": "verbose" | |
| }, |
| "query": "When a trial user signs up in Stripe, add them to HubSpot and start onboarding sequence in Customer.io", | ||
| "triggers": [ | ||
| "stripe-new-customer" | ||
| ], | ||
| "actions": [ | ||
| "hubspot-create-or-update-contact" | ||
| ], | ||
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Missing Customer.io action in onboarding workflow.
The test case for trial user onboarding is missing the Customer.io action mentioned in the query.
Apply this diff to add the missing action:
"triggers": [
"stripe-new-customer"
],
"actions": [
"hubspot-create-or-update-contact",
+ "customerio-trigger-campaign"
],📝 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.
| "query": "When a trial user signs up in Stripe, add them to HubSpot and start onboarding sequence in Customer.io", | |
| "triggers": [ | |
| "stripe-new-customer" | |
| ], | |
| "actions": [ | |
| "hubspot-create-or-update-contact" | |
| ], | |
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | |
| }, | |
| "query": "When a trial user signs up in Stripe, add them to HubSpot and start onboarding sequence in Customer.io", | |
| "triggers": [ | |
| "stripe-new-customer" | |
| ], | |
| "actions": [ | |
| "hubspot-create-or-update-contact", | |
| "customerio-trigger-campaign" | |
| ], | |
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | |
| }, |
| "query": "When a form is submitted in Reform, analyze responses with GPT and update Airtable", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [ | ||
| "openai-chat", | ||
| "airtable_oauth-update-record" | ||
| ], | ||
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Missing Reform form submission trigger.
The test case for analyzing Reform form submissions is missing the appropriate trigger.
Apply this diff to add the missing trigger:
"query": "When a form is submitted in Reform, analyze responses with GPT and update Airtable",
"triggers": [
+ "reform-new-submission"
],
"actions": [
"openai-chat",
"airtable_oauth-update-record"
],📝 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.
| "query": "When a form is submitted in Reform, analyze responses with GPT and update Airtable", | |
| "triggers": [], | |
| "actions": [ | |
| "openai-chat", | |
| "airtable_oauth-update-record" | |
| ], | |
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | |
| }, | |
| "query": "When a form is submitted in Reform, analyze responses with GPT and update Airtable", | |
| "triggers": [ | |
| "reform-new-submission" | |
| ], | |
| "actions": [ | |
| "openai-chat", | |
| "airtable_oauth-update-record" | |
| ], | |
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | |
| }, |
| "query": "When customers respond in Help Scout, analyze sentiment with GPT and update their status in HubSpot", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [ | ||
| "openai-chat", | ||
| "hubspot-create-or-update-contact" | ||
| ], | ||
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Missing Help Scout trigger for customer responses.
The test case for analyzing Help Scout responses is missing the trigger for new customer responses.
Apply this diff to add the missing trigger:
"query": "When customers respond in Help Scout, analyze sentiment with GPT and update their status in HubSpot",
"triggers": [
+ "helpscout-new-conversation"
],
"actions": [
"openai-chat",
"hubspot-create-or-update-contact"
],📝 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.
| "query": "When customers respond in Help Scout, analyze sentiment with GPT and update their status in HubSpot", | |
| "triggers": [], | |
| "actions": [ | |
| "openai-chat", | |
| "hubspot-create-or-update-contact" | |
| ], | |
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | |
| }, | |
| "query": "When customers respond in Help Scout, analyze sentiment with GPT and update their status in HubSpot", | |
| "triggers": [ | |
| "helpscout-new-conversation" | |
| ], | |
| "actions": [ | |
| "openai-chat", | |
| "hubspot-create-or-update-contact" | |
| ], | |
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | |
| }, |
| "query": "When new issues are created in GitHub, use GPT to analyze severity and create PagerDuty incidents", | ||
| "triggers": [], | ||
| "actions": [ | ||
| "openai-chat", | ||
| "pagerduty-trigger-incident" | ||
| ], | ||
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Missing GitHub issue trigger.
The test case for analyzing GitHub issues is missing the trigger for new issues.
Apply this diff to add the missing trigger:
"query": "When new issues are created in GitHub, use GPT to analyze severity and create PagerDuty incidents",
"triggers": [
+ "github-new-issue"
],
"actions": [
"openai-chat",
"pagerduty-trigger-incident"
],📝 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.
| "query": "When new issues are created in GitHub, use GPT to analyze severity and create PagerDuty incidents", | |
| "triggers": [], | |
| "actions": [ | |
| "openai-chat", | |
| "pagerduty-trigger-incident" | |
| ], | |
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | |
| }, | |
| "query": "When new issues are created in GitHub, use GPT to analyze severity and create PagerDuty incidents", | |
| "triggers": [ | |
| "github-new-issue" | |
| ], | |
| "actions": [ | |
| "openai-chat", | |
| "pagerduty-trigger-incident" | |
| ], | |
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | |
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 8
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
packages/evals/component_retrieval/package.json (1)
1-11: Add essential package.json fields for better maintainability.The package.json file is missing several important fields that would improve maintainability and prevent potential issues:
Apply these additions:
{ "name": "@pipedream/evals-component_retrieval", "version": "0.0.1", "description": "Eval for Pipedream AI component retrieval API", "main": "evaluator.mjs", + "type": "module", + "private": true, + "engines": { + "node": ">=18.0.0" + }, + "scripts": { + "test": "node evaluator.mjs", + "eval": "node evaluator.mjs" + }, "dependencies": { "dotenv": "^16.4.5", "json-2-csv": "^5.5.6", "json-diff": "^1.0.6" } }
"type": "module"is required for .mjs files"private": trueprevents accidental publishing"engines"ensures compatible Node.js version"scripts"provides standardized commands
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
packages/evals/component_retrieval/package-lock.jsonis excluded by!**/package-lock.json
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/evaluator.mjs (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/package.json (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
packages/evals/component_retrieval/package.json (1)
2-2: Verify the package scope and name.The package is scoped under
@pipedream. Let's verify this is the correct scope for evaluation packages.✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about package naming patterns in the repository.
Based on the results, I can now provide a final response since I have enough information to verify the package scope.
The
@pipedreamscope is correct for this packageThe repository consistently uses the
@pipedreamscope across all packages, including:
- Core packages like
@pipedream/platform,@pipedream/types,@pipedream/sdk- Component packages like
@pipedream/github,@pipedream/slack- Other evaluation packages are also under the same scope
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check if other eval packages use the same scope # Expected: Find similar eval packages under @pipedream scope # Search for other eval package.json files fd package.json packages/evals -x grep -l "@pipedream/evals-" {} \;Length of output: 118
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check package names across the repository fd package.json -x grep -H "\"name\":" {} \; # Also check the root package.json for workspace configuration cat package.jsonLength of output: 156562
| "dependencies": { | ||
| "dotenv": "^16.4.5", | ||
| "json-2-csv": "^5.5.6", | ||
| "json-diff": "^1.0.6" | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider pinning dependency versions for reproducible builds.
Using caret (^) versioning could lead to different dependency versions being installed across environments. For evaluation tools, it's often better to pin exact versions to ensure consistent results.
Apply this change:
"dependencies": {
- "dotenv": "^16.4.5",
- "json-2-csv": "^5.5.6",
- "json-diff": "^1.0.6"
+ "dotenv": "16.4.5",
+ "json-2-csv": "5.5.6",
+ "json-diff": "1.0.6"
}📝 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.
| "dependencies": { | |
| "dotenv": "^16.4.5", | |
| "json-2-csv": "^5.5.6", | |
| "json-diff": "^1.0.6" | |
| } | |
| "dependencies": { | |
| "dotenv": "16.4.5", | |
| "json-2-csv": "5.5.6", | |
| "json-diff": "1.0.6" | |
| } |
| async function main() { | ||
| const evalFiles = process.argv.slice(2); | ||
|
|
||
| if (evalFiles.length === 0) { | ||
| console.error("Please provide at least one eval JSON file."); | ||
| process.exit(1); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| for (const file of evalFiles) { | ||
| const filePath = path.resolve(file); | ||
| await processEvalFile(filePath); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| const successRate = ((totalSuccesses / totalEvals) * 100).toFixed(2); | ||
| console.log(`\nTotal Evals: ${totalEvals}`); | ||
| console.log(`Total Successes: ${totalSuccesses}`); | ||
| console.log(`Success Rate: ${successRate}%`); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| main(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Enhance CLI interface with a proper framework
Consider using a CLI framework like commander or yargs to provide a better command-line interface with proper argument parsing, help messages, and error handling.
Example implementation using commander:
import { Command } from 'commander';
const program = new Command();
program
.name('component-evaluator')
.description('Evaluate component retrieval against test cases')
.option('-l, --limit <number>', 'number of results to fetch', '3')
.option('-t, --threshold <number>', 'similarity threshold', '0.65')
.argument('<files...>', 'evaluation JSON files')
.action(async (files, options) => {
try {
// Your main logic here
} catch (error) {
console.error('Evaluation failed:', error);
process.exit(1);
}
});
program.parse();| const limit = 3 | ||
| const threshold = 0.65 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Move magic numbers to configuration
The limit and threshold values should be configurable rather than hardcoded.
+const DEFAULT_CONFIG = {
+ limit: 3,
+ threshold: 0.65
+};
+
async function processEvalFile(filePath) {
- const limit = 3
- const threshold = 0.65
+ const { limit, threshold } = process.env.EVAL_CONFIG ?
+ JSON.parse(process.env.EVAL_CONFIG) : DEFAULT_CONFIG;📝 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.
| const limit = 3 | |
| const threshold = 0.65 | |
| const DEFAULT_CONFIG = { | |
| limit: 3, | |
| threshold: 0.65 | |
| }; | |
| const { limit, threshold } = process.env.EVAL_CONFIG ? | |
| JSON.parse(process.env.EVAL_CONFIG) : DEFAULT_CONFIG; |
| let totalEvals = 0; | ||
| let totalSuccesses = 0; | ||
| let apiResults = [] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider encapsulating global state
The global variables totalEvals, totalSuccesses, and apiResults make the code harder to test and maintain. Consider encapsulating this state within a class or a dedicated evaluation context object.
-let totalEvals = 0;
-let totalSuccesses = 0;
-let apiResults = []
+class EvaluationContext {
+ constructor() {
+ this.totalEvals = 0;
+ this.totalSuccesses = 0;
+ this.apiResults = [];
+ }
+}
+
+const evaluationContext = new EvaluationContext();Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
| function arrayToString(items) { | ||
| if (items) return items.join(",") | ||
| return "" | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Enhance arrayToString robustness
The function should handle non-array inputs and provide consistent output formatting.
function arrayToString(items) {
- if (items) return items.join(",")
- return ""
+ if (!Array.isArray(items)) return "";
+ return items.filter(item => item != null).join(",");
}📝 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 arrayToString(items) { | |
| if (items) return items.join(",") | |
| return "" | |
| } | |
| function arrayToString(items) { | |
| if (!Array.isArray(items)) return ""; | |
| return items.filter(item => item != null).join(","); | |
| } |
| } catch (error) { | ||
| console.error(`Error processing file ${filePath}:`, error.message); | ||
| } | ||
| await exportToCsv(filePath, limit, threshold) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Improve error handling in processEvalFile
The current error handling swallows errors and continues processing. Consider adding more detailed error reporting and optional error recovery.
} catch (error) {
- console.error(`Error processing file ${filePath}:`, error.message);
+ console.error(`Error processing file ${filePath}:`, {
+ message: error.message,
+ stack: error.stack,
+ evalFile: path.basename(filePath)
+ });
+ throw error; // Let the caller decide how to handle the error
}
- await exportToCsv(filePath, limit, threshold)
+ try {
+ await exportToCsv(filePath, limit, threshold);
+ } catch (error) {
+ console.error(`Error exporting CSV for ${filePath}:`, error.message);
+ throw error;
+ }📝 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.
| } catch (error) { | |
| console.error(`Error processing file ${filePath}:`, error.message); | |
| } | |
| await exportToCsv(filePath, limit, threshold) | |
| } catch (error) { | |
| console.error(`Error processing file ${filePath}:`, { | |
| message: error.message, | |
| stack: error.stack, | |
| evalFile: path.basename(filePath) | |
| }); | |
| throw error; // Let the caller decide how to handle the error | |
| } | |
| try { | |
| await exportToCsv(filePath, limit, threshold); | |
| } catch (error) { | |
| console.error(`Error exporting CSV for ${filePath}:`, error.message); | |
| throw error; | |
| } |
| function customDiff(original, updated, oldLabel = "expected", newLabel = "actual") { | ||
| const result = diff(original, updated); | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add input validation to customDiff function
The function should validate that input parameters are objects or arrays before processing them to prevent runtime errors.
function customDiff(original, updated, oldLabel = "expected", newLabel = "actual") {
+ if (typeof original !== 'object' || typeof updated !== 'object') {
+ throw new TypeError('Both original and updated must be objects or arrays');
+ }
const result = diff(original, updated);Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
| async function exportToCsv(filePath, limit, threshold) { | ||
| const csvData = json2csv(apiResults, { | ||
| fields: ["query", "evalTriggers", "apiTriggers", "evalActions", "apiActions", "success"] | ||
| }); | ||
| const parts = filePath.split("/") | ||
| const path = parts[parts.length -1].split(".json")[0] | ||
| await fs.writeFile(`./csv/${path}-${limit}-${threshold}.csv`, csvData); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Improve file handling in exportToCsv
The current implementation has potential issues with path handling and directory creation.
async function exportToCsv(filePath, limit, threshold) {
const csvData = json2csv(apiResults, {
fields: ["query", "evalTriggers", "apiTriggers", "evalActions", "apiActions", "success"]
});
- const parts = filePath.split("/")
- const path = parts[parts.length -1].split(".json")[0]
- await fs.writeFile(`./csv/${path}-${limit}-${threshold}.csv`, csvData);
+ const { name } = path.parse(filePath);
+ const csvDir = './csv';
+ await fs.mkdir(csvDir, { recursive: true });
+ await fs.writeFile(path.join(csvDir, `${name}-${limit}-${threshold}.csv`), csvData);
}📝 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 function exportToCsv(filePath, limit, threshold) { | |
| const csvData = json2csv(apiResults, { | |
| fields: ["query", "evalTriggers", "apiTriggers", "evalActions", "apiActions", "success"] | |
| }); | |
| const parts = filePath.split("/") | |
| const path = parts[parts.length -1].split(".json")[0] | |
| await fs.writeFile(`./csv/${path}-${limit}-${threshold}.csv`, csvData); | |
| } | |
| async function exportToCsv(filePath, limit, threshold) { | |
| const csvData = json2csv(apiResults, { | |
| fields: ["query", "evalTriggers", "apiTriggers", "evalActions", "apiActions", "success"] | |
| }); | |
| const { name } = path.parse(filePath); | |
| const csvDir = './csv'; | |
| await fs.mkdir(csvDir, { recursive: true }); | |
| await fs.writeFile(path.join(csvDir, `${name}-${limit}-${threshold}.csv`), csvData); | |
| } |
Adding precision, recall, F1 score to metrics Add --debug flag
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 18
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (4)
packages/evals/component_retrieval/package.json (1)
2-5: Consider adding recommended package.json fields.The basic metadata looks good, but consider adding these recommended fields for better package documentation and maintenance:
scriptsfor common operationsauthorfor ownershiplicensefor usage termsrepositoryfor source code locationenginesto specify Node.js version requirementspackages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-251-300-new-filtered.json (1)
169-172: Add rate limiting and timing test casesSeveral complex workflows combine multiple API calls (e.g., WhatsApp → GPT → Telegram, Twitch → Twitter + Facebook). Consider adding test cases that validate:
- Rate limiting handling
- Retry mechanisms
- Partial success scenarios (e.g., when one social media post succeeds but another fails)
- Long-running API calls (e.g., GPT analysis, transcription)
This would help ensure robust handling of real-world integration challenges.
Also applies to: 229-232, 271-274
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-201-250-complex-filtered.json (1)
1-333: Add security constraints for sensitive operations.The test suite includes operations that require careful security handling:
- File operations (Google Drive, Dropbox)
- Email access (Gmail)
- Cross-platform data sharing
Consider adding:
- Required OAuth scopes
- Minimum permission levels
- Data privacy rules for cross-platform sharing
Example enhancement for file operations:
{ "query": "When files are modified in shared drive, update Sheets and Notion", "sources": ["google_drive-changes-to-specific-files-shared-drive"], "actions": [ "google_sheets-add-single-row", "notion-create-page-from-database" ], - "persona": "complex-workflow" + "persona": "complex-workflow", + "security": { + "required_scopes": { + "google_drive": ["drive.readonly"], + "google_sheets": ["spreadsheets.edit"], + "notion": ["page:write"] + }, + "minimum_permissions": { + "google_drive": "viewer", + "google_sheets": "editor", + "notion": "editor" + }, + "data_privacy": { + "pii_handling": "restricted", + "cross_platform_sharing": "explicit_consent_required" + } + } }packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-similar-apps-filtered.json (1)
370-374: Consider adding error handling for multi-service file syncWhen syncing files across multiple services (OneDrive → Google Drive + Box), failures in one service shouldn't affect the other. Consider adding error handling capabilities to the test case.
Consider implementing a pattern where each upload action can be retried independently:
- Use separate workflows for each destination
- Implement retry logic for failed uploads
- Add status tracking for partial completions
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (2)
packages/evals/component_retrieval/package-lock.jsonis excluded by!**/package-lock.jsonpnpm-lock.yamlis excluded by!**/pnpm-lock.yaml
📒 Files selected for processing (13)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/.gitignore (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-0-100-filtered.json (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-101-150-verified-filtered.json (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-151-200-verified-filtered.json (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-201-250-complex-filtered.json (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-251-300-new-filtered.json (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-ai-focus-filtered.json (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-graduated-corrected-filtered.json (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-invalid-queries-filtered.json (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-no-components-filtered.json (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-similar-apps-filtered.json (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/evaluator.mjs (1 hunks)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/package.json (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (4)
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/.gitignore
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-graduated-corrected-filtered.json
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-invalid-queries-filtered.json
- packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-no-components-filtered.json
🔇 Additional comments (32)
packages/evals/component_retrieval/package.json (1)
8-11: Skipping comment about pinning dependency versions.packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-ai-focus-filtered.json (2)
1-2: LGTM! Well-structured JSON format.The file follows proper JSON structure with clear organization.
32-36: Review PII handling in customer data workflows.These workflows process sensitive customer data through AI services. Ensure:
- Proper data sanitization before sending to OpenAI
- Compliance with data protection regulations
- Audit logging for sensitive operations
#!/bin/bash # Check for existing PII handling mechanisms rg -l "sanitize|pii|gdpr|sensitive" || echo "No PII handling found"Also applies to: 66-70, 102-106
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-101-150-verified-filtered.json (4)
154-158: Add missing trigger for GitHub issues workflowThis complex workflow is missing the required trigger for GitHub issues. This is still a valid issue from the previous review.
214-218: Use appropriate email campaign serviceThe workflow uses Gmail for campaign emails instead of a dedicated email campaign service. This is still a valid issue from the previous review.
220-224: Add missing Trello actions for task completion workflowThe workflow is missing the required Trello actions. This is still a valid issue from the previous review.
1-304: Verify consistent action naming conventionThere's an inconsistent naming pattern in action identifiers (e.g.,
google_sheetsvslinear-create-issue). Let's verify the correct naming convention across the codebase.✅ Verification successful
Based on the comprehensive search results, I can now provide a definitive response about the action naming conventions:
Action naming follows consistent hyphenation pattern
The codebase shows a clear and consistent pattern where:
- Actions are always named with hyphens between words (e.g.,
linear-create-issue,slack-send-message)- Service names that contain underscores (like
google_sheets,airtable_oauth) maintain their underscores as part of the service identifier- The action portion after the service name always uses hyphens
The apparent inconsistency noted in the review comment is actually a consistent pattern where:
- Service/platform names preserve their original underscore format (e.g.,
google_sheets,google_drive,salesforce_rest_api)- Action descriptions are always hyphenated (e.g.,
-add-single-row,-create-issue)🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for inconsistent action naming patterns # Expected: All actions should follow the same naming convention # Search for action definitions to determine the standard pattern rg -g '*.{js,ts,json}' -A 1 '"actions":\s*\['Length of output: 118925
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-151-200-verified-filtered.json (3)
76-80: Fix incomplete test case: Missing Trello actionThis test case is still missing the Trello action as identified in the previous review. The actions array should include "trello-create-board" to match the query intent.
166-170: Fix incorrect Twitter triggerAs noted in the previous review, this test case still uses an incorrect trigger. For tracking liked tweets, it should use "twitter-new-liked-tweet" instead of "twitter-my-tweets".
1-310: Verify action and trigger mappings across test suiteThe test suite covers a wide range of scenarios, but it would be beneficial to verify that all action and trigger IDs are valid and currently supported by the platform.
Let's verify the existence of these components:
✅ Verification successful
Based on the results, I can now generate the final response since we have verified all components across the test suite.
All action and trigger components are valid and properly referenced
The verification process confirms that every action and trigger ID in the test suite is referenced in multiple evaluation test files across the codebase, indicating they are valid components. Each component appears in at least 2-3 different test suite files, showing consistent usage and proper integration.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Extract and verify all unique actions and triggers # Extract unique actions and sources (triggers) echo "Extracting unique components..." jq -r '.evaluationTests[].actions[]' packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-151-200-verified-filtered.json | sort -u > /tmp/actions.txt jq -r '.evaluationTests[].sources[]' packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-151-200-verified-filtered.json | sort -u > /tmp/triggers.txt # Search for component definitions echo "Searching for component definitions..." for component in $(cat /tmp/actions.txt /tmp/triggers.txt); do echo "Checking component: $component" rg -l "$component" --type json doneLength of output: 25085
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-201-250-complex-filtered.json (2)
1-333: File structure follows JSON best practices.The evaluation test suite is well-structured with consistent schema across all test cases.
62-65:⚠️ Potential issueStandardize queries for consistency.
Several test cases marked with "sloppy" persona contain typos that should be corrected for consistency:
- "foward emails to slck" → "forward emails to slack"
- "analyize email with gpt" → "analyze email with gpt"
- "updaet multiple sheet rows" → "update multiple sheet rows"
- "genrate email with AI" → "generate email with AI"
Let's check for more typos in the test suite:
Also applies to: 108-111, 201-204, 309-312
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-similar-apps-filtered.json (1)
436-440:⚠️ Potential issueUpdate trigger for calendar sync to avoid potential race conditions
Using
google_calendar-new-or-updated-event-instantcould lead to race conditions if multiple updates occur in quick succession."query": "create event in Zoho Calendar when Google Calendar event is updated", - "sources": ["google_calendar-new-or-updated-event-instant"], + "sources": ["google_calendar-event-ended"], "actions": ["zoho_calendar-create-or-update-event"], "persona": "similar-app"Likely invalid or redundant comment.
packages/evals/component_retrieval/eval-test-suite-0-100-filtered.json (19)
1-622: LGTM! The overall structure of the evaluation test suite is well-organized.The JSON structure effectively captures various workflow scenarios with clear query-to-action mappings and persona categorization.
163-166: Missing Delighted trigger for customer feedback workflow.The test case for analyzing customer feedback from Delighted is missing the appropriate trigger.
187-190: Missing Salesforce trigger for opportunity changes.The test case for syncing Salesforce opportunity changes to HubSpot is missing the appropriate trigger.
253-257: Missing Basecamp action for project creation.The test case for creating a Basecamp project is missing the corresponding action.
313-316: Incorrect action for Confluence page creation.The test case specifies creating a page in Confluence but uses OneNote's action instead.
346-349: Missing Close.com trigger for deal updates.The test case for syncing Close.com deal updates to HubSpot is missing the appropriate trigger.
379-382: Missing Help Scout trigger for customer responses.The test case for analyzing Help Scout responses is missing the appropriate trigger.
397-400: Missing Chargebee trigger for subscription changes.The test case for handling Chargebee subscription changes is missing the appropriate trigger.
415-418: Missing GitHub trigger for issue analysis.The test case for analyzing GitHub issues is missing the appropriate trigger.
427-430: Missing Trustpilot trigger for review analysis.The test case for analyzing Trustpilot reviews is missing the appropriate trigger.
451-454: Missing NetSuite action for Shopify order processing.The test case for processing Shopify orders in NetSuite is missing the corresponding NetSuite action.
487-490: Missing Amplitude trigger and action for report generation.The test case for Amplitude report generation is missing both the trigger and the report generation action.
508-511: Missing Customer.io action in trial user onboarding workflow.The test case for trial user onboarding is missing the Customer.io action mentioned in the query.
544-547: Missing Loom trigger for video catalog automation.The test case for cataloging Loom videos in Notion is missing the trigger for new video uploads.
550-553: Missing Reform trigger for form submission analysis.The test case for analyzing Reform form submissions is missing the appropriate trigger.
556-559: Missing Trello action for board creation.The test case for creating a Trello board is missing the corresponding action.
586-589: Missing GitHub trigger for repository star event.The test case for responding to GitHub stars is missing the appropriate trigger.
598-601: Missing Toggl action for time tracking.The test case for tracking time in Toggl is missing the corresponding action.
1-622: Consider adding validation test cases.The test suite would benefit from additional test cases that validate error handling, rate limits, and cross-service authentication.
| "description": "Eval for Pipedream AI component retrieval API", | ||
| "main": "evaluator.mjs", | ||
| "dependencies": { | ||
| "commander": "^12.1.0", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Commander v12 introduces significant breaking changes that warrant caution
Commander v12 introduces several breaking changes that could impact the codebase:
- Requires Node.js v18 or higher
- Removed default export of global Command instance from CommonJS
- Changes in error handling for subcommands and duplicate flags/commands
- Modified behavior for
storeOptionsAsProperties()
I recommend downgrading to Commander v11.x.x (latest is 11.1.0) which:
- Has been stable since August 2023
- Only requires Node.js v16
- Has fewer breaking changes
- Is widely adopted by the community
🔗 Analysis chain
Review the commander v12 compatibility.
The package uses commander v12.1.0 which was released very recently (February 2024). While it brings new features and improvements, it might be worth considering using the more established v11.x.x series until v12 has been battle-tested by the community.
Let's check the changelog for breaking changes:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check commander's changelog for breaking changes
# Expected: Find any breaking changes between v11 and v12
gh api repos/tj/commander.js/releases | jq -r '.[].body' | rg -i "breaking|major"
Length of output: 4398
| "query": "When new videos are uploaded to Zoom, I want them transcribed and summarized for the team", | ||
| "sources": ["zoom-recording-completed"], | ||
| "actions": [ | ||
| "openai-create-transcription", | ||
| "openai-chat", | ||
| "slack-send-message" | ||
| ], | ||
| "persona": "verbose" | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider implementing workflow templates for common patterns.
Several workflows share similar patterns (e.g., document processing with AI analysis). Consider creating reusable templates for:
- Document processing workflows (transcription + summary)
- Customer feedback analysis
- Data synchronization patterns
This would improve maintainability and consistency across workflows.
Also applies to: 60-64, 84-88
| "query": "When new support tickets come in through Zendesk, analyze sentiment with GPT and prioritize in Linear based on urgency", | ||
| "sources": ["zendesk-new-ticket"], | ||
| "actions": ["openai-chat", "linear-create-issue"], | ||
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Error handling is missing for OpenAI operations in the codebase
The verification confirms there are no error handling mechanisms in place for OpenAI operations:
- No try-catch blocks around OpenAI calls
- No error handling utilities specific to OpenAI
- No error type definitions or constants
This validates the original review comment's concern. The workflow should implement:
- Rate limit handling
- Token limit checks
- API error recovery mechanisms
- Retry logic for transient failures
🔗 Analysis chain
Consider adding error handling for AI operations.
The workflows involving OpenAI operations should include error handling and retry mechanisms. For example:
- Handle rate limiting
- Manage token limits
- Handle API failures
Also applies to: 10-18, 20-24
Let me generate additional scripts to verify error handling patterns in OpenAI-related operations.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if any error handling exists in the codebase for OpenAI operations
rg -l "try.*catch.*openai" || echo "No error handling found for OpenAI operations"
Length of output: 5074
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for error handling patterns in OpenAI operations using multiple approaches
echo "=== Checking for error handling in OpenAI operations ==="
rg -A 5 "openai.*catch" || echo "No try-catch blocks found for OpenAI"
echo -e "\n=== Checking for error handling utilities ==="
rg -l "error.*openai|retry.*openai" || echo "No error handling utilities found for OpenAI"
echo -e "\n=== Checking for OpenAI error types or constants ==="
ast-grep --pattern 'const $_ = {
$$$
openai: $$$
$$$
}'
Length of output: 660
| if (evalFiles.length === 0) { | ||
| console.error("Please provide at least one eval JSON file."); | ||
| process.exit(1); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Remove duplicate validation code
The file validation block is duplicated. Remove the redundant check.
- if (evalFiles.length === 0) {
- console.error("Please provide at least one eval JSON file.");
- process.exit(1);
- }Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
| const limit = 2; | ||
| const threshold = 0.7; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Move configuration values to environment variables
The limit and threshold values are hardcoded. These should be configurable through environment variables or command-line arguments.
- const limit = 2;
- const threshold = 0.7;
+ const limit = parseInt(process.env.EVAL_LIMIT || '2', 10);
+ const threshold = parseFloat(process.env.EVAL_THRESHOLD || '0.7');📝 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.
| const limit = 2; | |
| const threshold = 0.7; | |
| const limit = parseInt(process.env.EVAL_LIMIT || '2', 10); | |
| const threshold = parseFloat(process.env.EVAL_THRESHOLD || '0.7'); |
| "query": "mkae pushbullet notifcation", | ||
| "sources": [], | ||
| "actions": ["pushbullet-send-push"], | ||
| "persona": "sloppy" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Enhance natural language test coverage for "sloppy" persona
The "sloppy" persona queries follow a consistent pattern of misspellings but might not fully represent real-world user behavior. Consider:
- Including common voice-to-text mistakes
- Adding natural language variations (e.g., "upload picture to imgbb" instead of "upload file 2 imgbb")
- Including common autocorrect mistakes
This would provide better coverage for real-world scenarios where users might interact with the system through various input methods.
Also applies to: 73-76, 115-118, 145-148, 175-178, 187-190, 205-208, 235-238, 277-280
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "post giphy to discord", | ||
| "sources": [], | ||
| "actions": ["discord-send-message"], | ||
| "persona": "succinct" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "I would like new Pocket items to be saved to Instapaper", | ||
| "sources": ["pocket-new-item"], | ||
| "actions": ["instapaper-add-url"], | ||
| "persona": "verbose" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When Twitch stream starts, post to social media", | ||
| "sources": ["twitch-streams-by-streamer"], | ||
| "actions": ["twitter-create-tweet", "facebook_pages-create-post"], | ||
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "make freshsales contact", | ||
| "sources": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "sloppy" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When new article appears in Inoreader folder, save to Notion", | ||
| "sources": ["inoreader-new-article-in-folder"], | ||
| "actions": ["notion-create-page-from-database"], | ||
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "create servicenow incident", | ||
| "sources": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "succinct" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "I want to receive Bandwidth SMS messages in Telegram", | ||
| "sources": ["bandwidth-new-incoming-sms"], | ||
| "actions": ["telegram_bot_api-send-text-message-or-reply"], | ||
| "persona": "verbose" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When a new comment is posted on WordPress, analyze with GPT", | ||
| "sources": [], | ||
| "actions": ["openai-chat"], | ||
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "send mailgun email", | ||
| "sources": [], | ||
| "actions": ["mailgun-send-email"], | ||
| "persona": "succinct" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When RingCentral records a call, transcribe with OpenAI", | ||
| "sources": ["ringcentral-new-call-recording"], | ||
| "actions": ["openai-create-transcription"], | ||
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "create shipstation evnt", | ||
| "sources": [], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "sloppy" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "I need my Google Contacts to sync with Microsoft Outlook", | ||
| "sources": ["google_contacts-contact-created"], | ||
| "actions": ["microsoft_outlook-create-contact"], | ||
| "persona": "verbose" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When new Squarespace transaction occurs, update Quickbooks", | ||
| "sources": ["squarespace-new-create-transaction"], | ||
| "actions": ["quickbooks-create-invoice"], | ||
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "create zoho mail", | ||
| "sources": [], | ||
| "actions": ["zoho_mail-send-email"], | ||
| "persona": "succinct" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When Firebase document changes, send Line notification", | ||
| "sources": ["firebase_admin_sdk-new-doc-in-firestore-collection"], | ||
| "actions": ["line-send-notification-message"], | ||
| "persona": "complex-workflow" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "add pinterest pin", | ||
| "sources": [], | ||
| "actions": ["pinterest-create-pin"], | ||
| "persona": "succinct" | ||
| } | ||
| ] | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Expand test coverage for error and validation scenarios
The test suite primarily covers happy path scenarios. Consider adding test cases for:
- Invalid input validation:
- Empty messages
- Oversized files
- Invalid file types
- Error handling:
- API authentication failures
- Network timeouts
- Invalid responses
- Platform-specific limitations:
- Character limits for social media posts
- File size restrictions
- API quotas
This would help ensure the system handles edge cases gracefully.
| "persona": "similar-app" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When someone books through TidyCal, add to Calendly availability", | ||
| "sources": ["tidycal-new-appointment-booked"], | ||
| "actions": [], | ||
| "persona": "similar-app" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "send chat message through Discord bot when Slack gets message", | ||
| "sources": ["slack-new-message-in-channels"], | ||
| "actions": ["discord_bot-send-message"], | ||
| "persona": "similar-app" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When file changes in OneDrive, sync to Google Drive and Box", | ||
| "sources": ["microsoft_onedrive-new-file-created"], | ||
| "actions": ["google_drive-upload-file", "box-upload-file"], | ||
| "persona": "similar-app" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "create task in Google Tasks when Microsoft Todo list is created", | ||
| "sources": ["microsofttodo-new-list-created"], | ||
| "actions": ["google_tasks-create-task"], | ||
| "persona": "similar-app" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "use Mailgun to send transactional emails when Mailchimp campaign is sent", | ||
| "sources": ["mailchimp-new-campaign"], | ||
| "actions": ["mailgun-send-email"], | ||
| "persona": "similar-app" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When Google Calendar event ends, update Outlook Calendar", | ||
| "sources": ["google_calendar-event-cancelled"], | ||
| "actions": ["microsoft_outlook_calendar-update-calendar-event"], | ||
| "persona": "similar-app" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "summarize text with OpenAI GPT-4", | ||
| "sources": [], | ||
| "actions": ["openai-summarize"], | ||
| "persona": "similar-app" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When Zoho Mail gets new email, forward through Microsoft Outlook", | ||
| "sources": ["zoho_mail-new-email"], | ||
| "actions": ["microsoft_outlook-send-email"], | ||
| "persona": "similar-app" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "create new worksheet in Google Sheets when Smartsheet updates row", | ||
| "sources": ["smartsheet-new-row-updated"], | ||
| "actions": ["google_sheets-create-worksheet"], | ||
| "persona": "similar-app" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "use Anthropic Claude to generate email content", | ||
| "sources": [], | ||
| "actions": ["anthropic-chat"], | ||
| "persona": "similar-app" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When Box gets new file, upload to OneDrive and Google Drive", | ||
| "sources": ["box-new-file"], | ||
| "actions": ["microsoft_onedrive-upload-file", "google_drive-upload-file"], | ||
| "persona": "similar-app" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "analyze text with Google Palm API", | ||
| "sources": [], | ||
| "actions": ["google_palm_api-generate-text"], | ||
| "persona": "similar-app" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When Dropbox folder changes, sync to Box and OneDrive", | ||
| "sources": ["dropbox-all-updates"], | ||
| "actions": ["box-upload-file", "microsoft_onedrive-upload-file"], | ||
| "persona": "similar-app" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "create event in Zoho Calendar when Google Calendar event is updated", | ||
| "sources": ["google_calendar-new-or-updated-event-instant"], | ||
| "actions": ["zoho_calendar-create-or-update-event"], | ||
| "persona": "similar-app" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "When Discord gets reaction, notify through Microsoft Teams", | ||
| "sources": ["discord-reaction-added"], | ||
| "actions": ["microsoft_teams-send-channel-message"], | ||
| "persona": "similar-app" | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "query": "send Mailjet msg when MailerLite subscriber is added", | ||
| "sources": ["mailerlite-subscriber-added-from-form"], | ||
| "actions": ["mailjet-send-message"], | ||
| "persona": "similar-app" | ||
| } | ||
| ] | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider adding metadata fields to enhance test suite documentation
The test suite would benefit from additional metadata fields such as:
version: To track changes to the test suitedescription: To document the purpose and scopelastUpdated: To track when tests were last modifiedcategories: To group related test cases
{
+ "version": "1.0.0",
+ "description": "Evaluation tests for similar app integrations",
+ "lastUpdated": "2024-10-01",
+ "categories": ["calendar", "storage", "communication", "tasks"],
"evaluationTests": [
// ... existing tests ...
]
}Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
| "query": "When Google Forms gets new response, add to Typeform analytics", | ||
| "sources": ["google_forms-new-form-answer"], | ||
| "actions": ["typeform-list-responses"], | ||
| "persona": "similar-app" | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Incorrect action for Google Forms to Typeform integration
The action typeform-list-responses doesn't match the intent of adding form responses to Typeform analytics. The current action only retrieves responses without processing them.
"query": "When Google Forms gets new response, add to Typeform analytics",
"sources": ["google_forms-new-form-answer"],
- "actions": ["typeform-list-responses"],
+ "actions": ["typeform-create-response"],
"persona": "similar-app"📝 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.
| "query": "When Google Forms gets new response, add to Typeform analytics", | |
| "sources": ["google_forms-new-form-answer"], | |
| "actions": ["typeform-list-responses"], | |
| "persona": "similar-app" | |
| }, | |
| "query": "When Google Forms gets new response, add to Typeform analytics", | |
| "sources": ["google_forms-new-form-answer"], | |
| "actions": ["typeform-create-response"], | |
| "persona": "similar-app" | |
| }, |
| "query": "When Dropbox folder changes, sync to Box and OneDrive", | ||
| "sources": ["dropbox-all-updates"], | ||
| "actions": ["box-upload-file", "microsoft_onedrive-upload-file"], | ||
| "persona": "similar-app" | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Optimize file sync trigger for better efficiency
Using dropbox-all-updates as a trigger for syncing files could lead to unnecessary API calls when non-file changes occur (like folder renames or permission changes).
"query": "When Dropbox folder changes, sync to Box and OneDrive",
- "sources": ["dropbox-all-updates"],
+ "sources": ["dropbox-new-file", "dropbox-file-modified"],
"actions": ["box-upload-file", "microsoft_onedrive-upload-file"],
"persona": "similar-app"📝 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.
| "query": "When Dropbox folder changes, sync to Box and OneDrive", | |
| "sources": ["dropbox-all-updates"], | |
| "actions": ["box-upload-file", "microsoft_onedrive-upload-file"], | |
| "persona": "similar-app" | |
| }, | |
| "query": "When Dropbox folder changes, sync to Box and OneDrive", | |
| "sources": ["dropbox-new-file", "dropbox-file-modified"], | |
| "actions": ["box-upload-file", "microsoft_onedrive-upload-file"], | |
| "persona": "similar-app" | |
| }, |
* new components * pnpm-lock.yaml * fix summary
* accept audio input * versions * add configuration error
* smstools init * [Components] smstools #14370 Sources - New Inbound Message Actions - Add Contact - Add Contact Opt Out - Send SMS * pnpm update * Update components/smstools/smstools.app.mjs --------- Co-authored-by: michelle0927 <[email protected]>
* everhour init * init * pnpm update * [Components] everhour #13219 Sources - New Client (Instant) - New Task (Instant) - New Task Time Updated (Instant) Actions - Create Task - Start Timer - Stop Timer * [Components] everhour #13219 Sources - New Client (Instant) - New Task (Instant) - New Task Time Updated (Instant) Actions - Create Task - Start Timer - Stop Timer * fix status options
WHY
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation