fix(cli): summarize nested user/owner fields in -o table (FT-1942)#39
fix(cli): summarize nested user/owner fields in -o table (FT-1942)#39joalves wants to merge 10 commits into
Conversation
…stringify
Nested objects (created_by, updated_by, owner, etc.) rendered in -o table /
-o vertical / -o markdown / -o plain are now rendered as a short summary
('First Last', email, name, title, or [object]) instead of a JSON blob. -o
json / -o yaml are unchanged. (FT-1942)
…ist -o table (FT-1942)
WalkthroughThis PR establishes object value summarisation utilities and extends entity-row formatting across the CLI's list commands. It introduces Estimated code review effort🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~25 minutes Possibly related PRs
Poem
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
src/commands/apps/apps.test.ts (1)
56-59: ⚡ Quick winAdd coverage for
created_bysummarisation in the list assertion.This matcher now only checks
id/name, so the newcreated_byformatting path can regress unnoticed.Suggested test tightening
- const mockClient = { - listApplications: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue([{ id: 1, name: 'web' }]), + const mockClient = { + listApplications: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue([ + { + id: 1, + name: 'web', + created_by: { first_name: 'Ada', last_name: 'Lovelace', email: 'ada@example.com' }, + }, + ]), @@ - expect(printFormatted).toHaveBeenCalledWith( - [expect.objectContaining({ id: 1, name: 'web' })], - expect.anything() - ); + expect(printFormatted).toHaveBeenCalledWith( + [expect.objectContaining({ id: 1, name: 'web', created_by: 'Ada Lovelace' })], + expect.anything() + );🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate. In `@src/commands/apps/apps.test.ts` around lines 56 - 59, Update the test assertion in apps.test.ts that checks printFormatted to also assert the created_by summarisation is present and correctly formatted: locate the expect(printFormatted).toHaveBeenCalledWith(...) assertion and extend the expect.objectContaining payload for the app entry (id: 1, name: 'web') to include a created_by property check (use a matcher like expect.stringMatching or expect.any(String) with a regex that matches the expected summary format) so the test will fail if the created_by formatting path regresses.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@src/commands/apikeys/apikeys.test.ts`:
- Line 115: The test contains a secret-like literal assigned to hashed_key which
can trigger leak scanners; replace the real-looking value in the test (the
hashed_key string in src/commands/apikeys/apikeys.test.ts) with an obviously
synthetic placeholder (e.g., "FAKE_HASHED_KEY_PLACEHOLDER" or similar) so it no
longer resembles a real credential; update any assertions or fixtures that
reference this exact value to use the new placeholder constant to keep tests
consistent.
---
Nitpick comments:
In `@src/commands/apps/apps.test.ts`:
- Around line 56-59: Update the test assertion in apps.test.ts that checks
printFormatted to also assert the created_by summarisation is present and
correctly formatted: locate the expect(printFormatted).toHaveBeenCalledWith(...)
assertion and extend the expect.objectContaining payload for the app entry (id:
1, name: 'web') to include a created_by property check (use a matcher like
expect.stringMatching or expect.any(String) with a regex that matches the
expected summary format) so the test will fail if the created_by formatting path
regresses.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Organization UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 85e72daf-eeca-4159-b453-93891ba52240
📒 Files selected for processing (19)
src/api-client/entity-summary.test.tssrc/api-client/entity-summary.tssrc/commands/apikeys/apikeys.test.tssrc/commands/apikeys/index.tssrc/commands/apps/apps.test.tssrc/commands/apps/index.tssrc/commands/envs/envs.test.tssrc/commands/envs/index.tssrc/commands/goaltags/index.tssrc/commands/metriccategories/index.tssrc/commands/metrictags/index.tssrc/commands/roles/index.tssrc/commands/roles/roles.test.tssrc/commands/tags/index.tssrc/commands/units/index.tssrc/commands/units/units.test.tssrc/commands/webhooks/index.tssrc/lib/output/formatter.test.tssrc/lib/output/formatter.ts
| id: 36, | ||
| name: 'test new key', | ||
| description: 'new key', | ||
| hashed_key: 'X99upHMkKKM2XUpRuZ53YWCDx5G93SgB043EXx3LG5k=', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Replace the secret-like test literal with a clearly fake placeholder.
This value is patterned like a real credential and can trigger leak scanners in CI/history. Use an obviously synthetic constant instead.
Suggested change
- hashed_key: 'X99upHMkKKM2XUpRuZ53YWCDx5G93SgB043EXx3LG5k=',
+ hashed_key: 'TEST_HASHED_KEY_PLACEHOLDER',📝 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.
| hashed_key: 'X99upHMkKKM2XUpRuZ53YWCDx5G93SgB043EXx3LG5k=', | |
| hashed_key: 'TEST_HASHED_KEY_PLACEHOLDER', |
🧰 Tools
🪛 Betterleaks (1.2.0)
[high] 115-115: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
In `@src/commands/apikeys/apikeys.test.ts` at line 115, The test contains a
secret-like literal assigned to hashed_key which can trigger leak scanners;
replace the real-looking value in the test (the hashed_key string in
src/commands/apikeys/apikeys.test.ts) with an obviously synthetic placeholder
(e.g., "FAKE_HASHED_KEY_PLACEHOLDER" or similar) so it no longer resembles a
real credential; update any assertions or fixtures that reference this exact
value to use the new placeholder constant to keep tests consistent.
1 participant
Summary
-o table/-o vertical/-o markdown/-o plainwith a smart summary:First Last, email,name,title, or the literal[object]. The root cause wasformatValuedoingJSON.stringify(value)on any nested object, which turned everycreated_bycell into a 600-char wall of JSON.summarizeRowto the list commands that previously dumped every API field:apikeys,envs,goaltags,metriccategories,metrictags,roles,tags,units,webhooksappslist summariser to reuse the sharedformatUserSummaryhelper.formatOwnerinentity-summary.tsnow delegates to the sameformatUserSummary, so curated row summaries and the default formatter agree.-o jsonand-o yamlare unchanged (they bypassformatValueentirely).--rawstill returns the full untransformed API response for any list command.JIRA
FT-1942 — CLI: clean up table output for commands that dump user/owner JSON blobs
Before / After
Before (the prompt that motivated this work — apikeys list -o table):
```
│ created_by │
│ {"id":4,"external_id":null,"email":"marcio@absmartly.com","first_name":"Márcio","last_name":"Martins",...} │
```
After:
```
│ created_by │
│ Márcio Martins │
```
Notes for reviewers
formatOwnerand theappssummarizeRowpreviously treated non-null/non-undefinedvalues as user-shaped. They now require an actual object. In practice the API always returns either a User object ornull/missing, so this is safer and not a regression.summarizeApiKeyRow/summarizeTagRowstyle added here, but inconsistent withsummarizeGoal/summarizeUserRowwhich run them throughformatDate). Aligning all summarizers onformatDatecould be a small follow-up.Test plan
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Tests