Arihan/mar 8 ability to comment by line of code in pr #55
Conversation
arihanv
commented
Dec 6, 2023
arihanv
commented
- This PR introduces the ability for Maige to add comments inline on changed files. This is done through parsing the git diff file and using the codeComment function.
- The reviewer agent automatically reviews PRs when they are opened and when new commits are pushed to them.
- Also, the reviewer agent can both answer questions about a PR (ex: What is page.tsx about?) and review the changes in files.
* Specify Weaviate schema in code
…han/mar-6-code-review-bot
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
|
…han/mar-8-ability-to-comment-by-line-of-code-in-pr
|
maige test |
| @@ -289,6 +253,60 @@ export const POST = async (req: Request) => { | |||
|
|
|||
| await incrementUsage(prisma, owner) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The incrementUsage function is defined and used in the app/api/webhook/github/route.ts file. It is utilized to track and increment the usage count for a customer when processing webhook events.
By Maige. How's my driving?
| @@ -167,60 +167,24 @@ export const POST = async (req: Request) => { | |||
| if (comment && !comment.body.toLowerCase().includes('maige')) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The new changes in the webhook route do not include a check for the 'maige' keyword in the comment body, which was present in the original code. This could potentially allow irrelevant comments to trigger the webhook actions.
By Maige. How's my driving?
| const diff = await res.text() | ||
|
|
||
| await reviewer({ | ||
| customerId, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The customerId parameter is missing in the reviewer function call within the POST method. This could lead to runtime errors when the reviewer function tries to access the customerId which would be undefined.
By Maige. How's my driving?
| if (!res.ok) return new Response('Could not fetch diff', {status: 503}) | ||
| const diff = await res.text() | ||
|
|
||
| await reviewer({ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The customerId is not being passed to the reviewer function call for the case when issue?.pull_request is true. This is inconsistent with the other reviewer function calls and might cause issues if customerId is expected within the reviewer function.
By Maige. How's my driving?
| if (!res.ok) return new Response('Could not fetch diff', {status: 503}) | ||
| const diff = await res.text() | ||
|
|
||
| await reviewer({ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The customerId parameter is not being passed to the reviewer function call within the POST method when handling the issue?.pull_request case. This could lead to runtime errors when the reviewer function tries to access the customerId which would be undefined.
By Maige. How's my driving?
| @@ -289,6 +253,60 @@ export const POST = async (req: Request) => { | |||
|
|
|||
| await incrementUsage(prisma, owner) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The incrementUsage function is being called without checking if the usage has exceeded the usageLimit. This could lead to overcounting usage and potentially allowing customers to exceed their usage limits without proper checks. Consider adding a check before incrementing usage to ensure that the limit has not been surpassed.
By Maige. How's my driving?
| @@ -12,36 +15,110 @@ const model = new ChatOpenAI({ | |||
| }) | |||
|
|
|||
| export async function reviewer({ | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The prComment tool's schema in lib/agents/reviewer.tsx is outdated. The severity parameter is no longer used in the prComment function, as seen in lib/tools/prComment.ts. Update the schema and function call to match the current implementation of prComment which only requires a comment parameter.
By Maige. How's my driving?
tedspare
deleted the
arihan/mar-8-ability-to-comment-by-line-of-code-in-pr
branch
