feat: v1 to v2 shift #1369
feat: v1 to v2 shift #1369
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
|
![entelligence-ai-pr-reviews[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/932812?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
| def remove(self, id: str) -> int: | ||
| response = self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) | ||
| return response.status_code |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The remove() method now returns HTTP status code but doesn't validate if the request was successful (2xx range). Should check status code is in success range before returning.
📝 Committable Code Suggestion
‼️ Ensure you review the code suggestion before committing it to the branch. Make sure it replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation.
| def remove(self, id: str) -> int: | |
| response = self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) | |
| return response.status_code | |
| def remove(self, id: str) -> int: | |
| response = self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) | |
| if 200 <= response.status_code < 300: | |
| return response.status_code | |
| raise Exception(f"Request failed with status code: {response.status_code}") |
| @@ -1528,8 +1528,9 @@ def create( | |||
| ) | |||
| return IntegrationModel(**response.json()) | |||
|
|
|||
| def remove(self, id: str) -> None: | |||
| self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) | |||
| def remove(self, id: str) -> int: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding docstring to document the return value and possible exceptions:
def remove(self, id: str) -> int:
"""Remove an integration by its ID.
Args:
id (str): The ID of the integration to remove
Returns:
int: HTTP status code of the delete operation
Raises:
HTTPError: If the delete operation fails
"""| def remove(self, id: str) -> None: | ||
| self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) | ||
| def remove(self, id: str) -> int: | ||
| response = self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding error handling using the existing _raise_if_required method to maintain consistency with the rest of the codebase:
response = self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id))
self._raise_if_required(response, status_code=204) # 204 is typical for successful DELETE
return response.status_code![ellipsis-dev[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/64358?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
❌ Changes requested. Reviewed everything up to 448d585 in 1 minute and 24 seconds
More details
- Looked at
16lines of code in1files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
6drafted comments based on config settings.
1. python/composio/client/collections.py:1532
- Draft comment:
Returning response.status_code directly; consider validating the response or handling errors before returning. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 10% vs. threshold = 50%
Looking at the code, I see that this is part of a Collection class that handles API requests. The base Collection class likely already handles error responses through self._raise_if_required() which is used in other methods. The change from returning None to returning status_code is reasonable and doesn't necessarily need additional validation since HTTP status codes are well-defined. The comment seems overly cautious without strong evidence of an actual issue.
I could be wrong about error handling in the base class. Without seeing the implementation of self.client.http.delete(), I can't be 100% sure how errors are handled.
Looking at the rest of the file, all other API calls use self._raise_if_required() which suggests there is already error handling infrastructure in place. The comment seems unnecessary given the existing patterns.
Delete this comment. The code follows established patterns in the codebase and returning status codes directly is a common practice. The comment suggests extra validation without clear evidence it's needed.
2. python/composio/client/collections.py:1531
- Draft comment:
Changing the return type from None to int may break existing code. Consider reviewing if clients expect None and if additional error handling (e.g. via self._raise_if_required) is needed. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
This is a valid concern - changing return types is a breaking change that could affect clients. However, in Python, many callers may ignore the return value entirely. The change seems intentional to provide more information to callers who want it. The original None return wasn't providing any value. The comment doesn't suggest a clear action - it just raises a vague concern about potential issues.
I could be underestimating the impact of this change. There could be test code or other clients that explicitly assert the return value is None.
While possible, explicit assertions on None return values are rare in Python. The benefit of providing status code information outweighs the small risk of breaking edge case usage.
Delete this comment. While it raises a valid concern, it's speculative and doesn't suggest a clear action. The change appears intentional and beneficial.
3. python/composio/client/collections.py:297
- Draft comment:
Typo in the docstring of the AppAuthScheme class: "App authenticatio scheme." should be "App authentication scheme." - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
4. python/composio/client/collections.py:640
- Draft comment:
Typo in the docstring of the 'callback' method in TriggerSubscription: "Register a trigger callaback." should be "Register a trigger callback." - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
5. python/composio/client/collections.py:501
- Draft comment:
Typo in the docstring of _ChunkedTriggerEventData: "Cunked trigger event data model." should be "Chunked trigger event data model." - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
6. python/composio/client/collections.py:1065
- Draft comment:
Typo in SearchResultTask: the field description has a typo in its description string. "Descrption of the subtask." should be "Description of the subtask." - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
Workflow ID: wflow_kI8nt2xtALQ8pQSf
Want Ellipsis to fix these issues? Tag @ellipsis-dev in a comment. You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
| @@ -1528,8 +1528,9 @@ def create( | |||
| ) | |||
| return IntegrationModel(**response.json()) | |||
|
|
|||
| def remove(self, id: str) -> None: | |||
| self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) | |||
| def remove(self, id: str) -> int: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Changing return type of remove() from None to int may break callers expecting no return. Update docs if intentional.
Code Review SummaryChanges Overview
Positive Aspects✅ Good improvement to return status code for better error handling Suggestions for Improvement
Code Quality Rating: 7/10The change is good but could be more robust with proper documentation and error handling. The core functionality improvement is valuable for better error handling in client code. The PR can be merged after addressing the documentation and error handling suggestions. |
| def remove(self, id: str) -> None: | ||
| self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) | ||
| response = self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The response from the DELETE request is captured but never used or checked for errors. Should validate the response status code to ensure deletion succeeded.
📝 Committable Code Suggestion
‼️ Ensure you review the code suggestion before committing it to the branch. Make sure it replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation.
| def remove(self, id: str) -> None: | |
| self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) | |
| response = self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) | |
| def remove(self, id: str) -> None: | |
| response = self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) | |
| if response.status_code not in (200, 204): | |
| raise Exception(f"Failed to delete resource. Status code: {response.status_code}") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
❌ Changes requested. Incremental review on 7611298 in 1 minute and 58 seconds
More details
- Looked at
13lines of code in1files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
5drafted comments based on config settings.
1. python/composio/client/collections.py:1532
- Draft comment:
Unused 'response' in remove(); if error checking is desired, consider using _raise_if_required(response) or remove the variable. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Marked as duplicate.
2. python/composio/client/collections.py:297
- Draft comment:
Typo: In the docstring for AppAuthScheme, 'App authenticatio scheme.' should be 'App authentication scheme.' - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
3. python/composio/client/collections.py:500
- Draft comment:
Typo: The docstring for _ChunkedTriggerEventData reads 'Cunked trigger event data model.' and should instead be 'Chunked trigger event data model.' - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
4. python/composio/client/collections.py:640
- Draft comment:
Typo: In the docstring for the callback method of TriggerSubscription, 'Register a trigger callaback.' should be 'Register a trigger callback.' - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
5. python/composio/client/collections.py:1066
- Draft comment:
Typo: The description for SearchResultTask has 'Descrption of the subtask.' which should be corrected to 'Description of the subtask.' - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
Workflow ID: wflow_aFZR59YWb3cz4Aup
Want Ellipsis to fix these issues? Tag @ellipsis-dev in a comment. You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
| @@ -1529,7 +1529,7 @@ def create( | |||
| return IntegrationModel(**response.json()) | |||
|
|
|||
| def remove(self, id: str) -> None: | |||
| self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) | |||
| response = self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The variable 'response' is now assigned but not used. If the response is important, consider validating its status or content; otherwise, remove the assignment.
| response = self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) | |
| self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) |
| def remove(self, id: str) -> None: | ||
| self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) | ||
|
|
||
| def delete(self, id: str) -> int: | ||
| response = self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) | ||
| return response.status_code |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Duplicate functionality with remove() and delete() methods doing the same thing. remove() should be removed or marked as deprecated since delete() provides more functionality by returning status code.
📝 Committable Code Suggestion
‼️ Ensure you review the code suggestion before committing it to the branch. Make sure it replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation.
| def remove(self, id: str) -> None: | |
| self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) | |
| def delete(self, id: str) -> int: | |
| response = self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) | |
| return response.status_code | |
| @deprecated("Use delete() instead as it provides status code information") | |
| def remove(self, id: str) -> None: | |
| self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) | |
| def delete(self, id: str) -> int: | |
| response = self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) | |
| return response.status_code |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
❌ Changes requested. Incremental review on 14452bd in 1 minute and 57 seconds
More details
- Looked at
16lines of code in1files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
6drafted comments based on config settings.
1. python/composio/client/collections.py:1532
- Draft comment:
Duplicate deletion methods: Both 'remove' and 'delete' perform the same HTTP call. Consider consolidating to a single clear method. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Marked as duplicate.
2. python/composio/client/collections.py:468
- Draft comment:
Typographical error: 'indetify' should be corrected to 'identify' in the description of the FileType 'name' field. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
3. python/composio/client/collections.py:297
- Draft comment:
Typographical error in the docstring: 'App authenticatio scheme.' should be 'App authentication scheme.' - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
4. python/composio/client/collections.py:640
- Draft comment:
Typographical error: The docstring 'Register a trigger callaback.' should be corrected to 'Register a trigger callback.' - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
5. python/composio/client/collections.py:500
- Draft comment:
Typographical error: In the docstring of _ChunkedTriggerEventData, 'Cunked' should be corrected to 'Chunked'. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
6. python/composio/client/collections.py:1066
- Draft comment:
Typographical error: In the SearchResultTask model, the field description's text 'Descrption of the subtask.' should be corrected to 'Description of the subtask.' - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
Workflow ID: wflow_YlUuC7Y3xxn2qhIH
Want Ellipsis to fix these issues? Tag @ellipsis-dev in a comment. You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
| @@ -1531,6 +1531,10 @@ def create( | |||
| def remove(self, id: str) -> None: | |||
| self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) | |||
|
|
|||
| def delete(self, id: str) -> int: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The new delete() method duplicates the HTTP delete call already used in remove(). Consider refactoring the common deletion logic into a helper (or have remove() delegate to delete()) to avoid duplication and potential inconsistencies. Also, clarify the intended difference between remove() (no return) and delete() (returning status code).
| def remove(self, id: str) -> None: | ||
| self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Removing the delete() method without providing an alternative could break backward compatibility for code that depends on getting the status code. The remove() method should return the status code or document the breaking change.
📝 Committable Code Suggestion
‼️ Ensure you review the code suggestion before committing it to the branch. Make sure it replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation.
| def remove(self, id: str) -> None: | |
| self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) | |
| def remove(self, id: str) -> int: | |
| response = self.client.http.delete(url=str(self.endpoint / id)) | |
| return response.status_code |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 6c79e0f in 45 seconds
More details
- Looked at
15lines of code in1files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
6drafted comments based on config settings.
1. python/composio/client/collections.py:1531
- Draft comment:
Removed thedeletemethod which previously returned the HTTP status code. Confirm that downstream tests and consumers now only use theremovemethod (which returns None) or update them accordingly for backward compatibility. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful =0%<= threshold50%
The comment is asking the PR author to confirm that downstream tests and consumers are updated, which violates the rule against asking for confirmation or ensuring behavior is intended. It also suggests updating for backward compatibility, which is not a direct code suggestion or specific request for a test.
2. python/composio/client/collections.py:1531
- Draft comment:
Removing the 'delete' method (which returned the status code) may be a breaking change if clients/tests expect its return value. Ensure that dependent code is updated or that a deprecation alias is provided. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful =0%<= threshold50%
The comment suggests ensuring that dependent code is updated or a deprecation alias is provided, which falls under asking the PR author to ensure behavior is intended or tested. This violates the rules.
3. python/composio/client/collections.py:468
- Draft comment:
Typo: In the FileType field description, 'indetify' should be corrected to 'identify'. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
4. python/composio/client/collections.py:1066
- Draft comment:
Typo: In the SearchResultTask model, change 'Descrption of the subtask.' to 'Description of the subtask.' - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
5. python/composio/client/collections.py:297
- Draft comment:
Typo: In the AppAuthScheme class docstring, change 'App authenticatio scheme.' to 'App authentication scheme.' - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
6. python/composio/client/collections.py:640
- Draft comment:
Typo: In the TriggerSubscription.callback method docstring, change 'Register a trigger callaback.' to 'Register a trigger callback.' - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
Workflow ID: wflow_dY2z0UYGMMqmBs5Q
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
This is just a draft PR to check why tests are failing on the original v1->v2 shift PR.
Important
Add two blank lines in
collections.pyafterremove()function.collections.pyafterremove()function.This description was created by
for 6c79e0f. It will automatically update as commits are pushed.