[Components] google_ad_manager - create report action component #14672
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎ 1 Skipped Deployment
|
|
@jcortes is attempting to deploy a commit to the Pipedreamers Team on Vercel. A member of the Team first needs to authorize it. |
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces multiple new modules and functionalities for the Google Ad Manager component. Key additions include a report creation action, utility functions for data parsing, and constants related to the Google Ad Manager API. The Changes
Assessment against linked issues
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
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: 8
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (9)
components/google_ad_manager/common/utils.mjs (2)
26-47: Improve array parsing error handling and consistencyThe current implementation has some inconsistencies in how it handles different types of input and could provide more specific error messages.
Consider these improvements:
function parseArray(value) { try { if (!value) { - return; + throw new Error("Empty or null input"); } if (Array.isArray(value)) { return value; } + if (typeof value !== 'string') { + throw new Error(`Expected string or array, got ${typeof value}`); + } + const parsedValue = JSON.parse(value); if (!Array.isArray(parsedValue)) { - throw new Error("Not an array"); + throw new Error(`Parsed value is ${typeof parsedValue}, expected array`); } return parsedValue; } catch (e) { - throw new ConfigurationError("Make sure the custom expression contains a valid array object"); + throw new ConfigurationError( + `Invalid array input: ${e.message}. Please provide a valid JSON array string or array object.` + ); } }
49-51: Add JSDoc documentation for exported functionalityThe exported method combines multiple operations but lacks documentation explaining its behavior.
Consider adding comprehensive documentation:
+/** + * Parses and validates array input, then recursively parses JSON strings within the array + * @param {string|Array} value - Array or JSON string representing an array + * @returns {Array|undefined} Parsed array with all elements JSON-parsed, or undefined if input is falsy + * @throws {ConfigurationError} If input cannot be parsed as an array + */ export default { parseArray: (value) => parseArray(value)?.map(parseJson), };components/google_ad_manager/google_ad_manager.app.mjs (2)
8-16: Consider enhancing the network options implementationWhile the implementation is functional, consider these improvements:
- Return both network ID and name for proper API integration
- Add error handling for the API call
- Consider caching the networks list to improve performance
Here's a suggested implementation:
network: { type: "string", label: "Network", description: "The network code of the parent network to create the report in.", async options() { - const { networks } = await this.listNetworks(); - return networks?.map(({ name }) => name); + try { + const { networks = [] } = await this.listNetworks(); + return networks.map(({ networkCode, name }) => ({ + label: name, + value: networkCode, + })); + } catch (error) { + console.error('Failed to fetch networks:', error); + return []; + } }, },
43-46: Add pagination handling for network listingThe
listNetworksmethod should handle pagination to ensure all networks are retrieved.-listNetworks() { +async listNetworks(params = {}) { return this._makeRequest({ path: "/networks", + params: { + pageSize: 100, + ...params, + }, }); }components/google_ad_manager/common/relative-date-ranges.mjs (1)
1-114: Well-structured constants with comprehensive date rangesThe constants are well-organized and follow Google Ad Manager's API specifications. The date ranges cover all common scenarios from single day to yearly periods.
Consider adding JSDoc comments to document:
- The purpose of this constants file
- The relationship with Google Ad Manager API
- The structure of each constant (value/label pattern)
components/google_ad_manager/common/metrics.mjs (2)
1-666: Consider enhancing code organization and documentation.While the implementation is thorough and follows a consistent structure, consider the following improvements:
- Add category headers to group related metrics
- Add JSDoc documentation with API references
+/** + * @fileoverview Google Ad Manager metrics constants. + * @see https://developers.google.com/ad-manager/api/reference/v202308/ReportService.Column + */ export default { + // Basic Metrics METRIC_UNSPECIFIED: { label: "Metric Unspecified", value: "METRIC_UNSPECIFIED", }, + // Active View Metrics ACTIVE_VIEW_AVERAGE_VIEWABLE_TIME: { label: "Active View Average Viewable Time", value: "ACTIVE_VIEW_AVERAGE_VIEWABLE_TIME", }, // ... more metrics + // Video Metrics VIDEO_INTERACTION_AVERAGE_INTERACTION_RATE: { label: "Video Interaction Average Interaction Rate", value: "VIDEO_INTERACTION_AVERAGE_INTERACTION_RATE", },
1-666: Consider adding type safety.The metrics object would benefit from TypeScript or JSDoc type definitions to ensure type safety when used in other parts of the application.
+/** + * @typedef {Object} Metric + * @property {string} label - Human-readable metric name + * @property {string} value - API metric identifier + */ +/** + * @type {Object.<string, Metric>} + */ export default { METRIC_UNSPECIFIED: { label: "Metric Unspecified", value: "METRIC_UNSPECIFIED", }, // ... more metrics };components/google_ad_manager/common/dimensions.mjs (2)
1-2190: Consider improving code organization and maintainabilityThe file contains a large number of dimension definitions that could benefit from better organization and documentation. Consider the following improvements:
- Split the dimensions into separate files by category (e.g., core dimensions, line items, orders, etc.)
- Add JSDoc documentation for the exported object
- Add section comments to group related dimensions
Example implementation:
+/** + * @typedef {Object} Dimension + * @property {string} label - Human-readable label for the dimension + * @property {string} value - API value for the dimension + */ + +// Core dimensions +export const coreDimensions = { + DIMENSION_UNSPECIFIED: { + label: "Dimension Unspecified", + value: "DIMENSION_UNSPECIFIED", + }, + // ... other core dimensions +}; + +// Line item dimensions +export const lineItemDimensions = { + LINE_ITEM_ID: { + label: "Line Item ID", + value: "LINE_ITEM_ID", + }, + // ... other line item dimensions +}; + +// Combine all dimensions +export default { + ...coreDimensions, + ...lineItemDimensions, + // ... other dimension categories +};
1-2190: Add TypeScript support for better type safetyThe dimensions object could benefit from TypeScript types to ensure type safety when used in other parts of the application.
Example implementation:
// dimensions.d.ts export interface Dimension { label: string; value: string; } export interface Dimensions { [key: string]: Dimension; } declare const dimensions: Dimensions; export default dimensions;
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
pnpm-lock.yamlis excluded by!**/pnpm-lock.yaml
📒 Files selected for processing (8)
components/google_ad_manager/actions/create-report/create-report.mjs(1 hunks)components/google_ad_manager/common/constants.mjs(1 hunks)components/google_ad_manager/common/dimensions.mjs(1 hunks)components/google_ad_manager/common/metrics.mjs(1 hunks)components/google_ad_manager/common/relative-date-ranges.mjs(1 hunks)components/google_ad_manager/common/utils.mjs(1 hunks)components/google_ad_manager/google_ad_manager.app.mjs(1 hunks)components/google_ad_manager/package.json(2 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- components/google_ad_manager/common/constants.mjs
🔇 Additional comments (7)
components/google_ad_manager/package.json (2)
3-3: LGTM: Version bump follows semantic versioning.
The increment to version 0.1.0 appropriately reflects the addition of new features (Google Ad Manager report creation functionality) while maintaining backward compatibility.
15-17: Verify @pipedream/platform version compatibility.
Let's ensure we're using an appropriate version of the @pipedream/platform package.
✅ Verification successful
Version 3.0.3 is compatible and up-to-date
The component is using the latest version (3.0.3) of @pipedream/platform package, which matches the current version available on npm. This version is also being actively used by many other components in the codebase.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check latest version of @pipedream/platform and its usage across components
# Check the latest version on npm
echo "Latest @pipedream/platform version:"
npm view @pipedream/platform version
# Check usage of @pipedream/platform across other components
echo -e "\nVersion usage across components:"
fd package.json components/ --exec grep -l "@pipedream/platform" {} \; | xargs grep -h "\"@pipedream/platform\":" || true
Length of output: 48740
components/google_ad_manager/common/utils.mjs (1)
1-51: Verify parsing compatibility with Google Ad Manager API
Let's ensure the parsing utilities handle all Google Ad Manager API report configuration formats correctly.
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more specific information about how these parsing utilities are used in the Google Ad Manager component.
Based on the search results, I can now provide a final verification response:
Parsing utilities are correctly implemented for Google Ad Manager API
The parsing utilities are properly used in the Google Ad Manager component, specifically in the create-report action where they handle:
- Report filters through
parseArray(filters) - Report flags through
parseArray(flags) - Report sorts through
parseArray(sorts)
The implementation correctly handles:
- Nested JSON structures through recursive parsing
- Array validation with proper error handling
- Type coercion and sanitization
- Configuration error reporting
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for Google Ad Manager report configuration examples in the codebase
rg -l "googleads" | xargs rg -B 2 -A 2 "reportJob|ReportJob"
# Look for existing report configuration tests
fd -e test.js -e spec.js | xargs rg "google.*report"
Length of output: 9193
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check how parseArray and parseJson are used in Google Ad Manager component
rg -A 5 -B 5 "parseArray|parseJson" components/google_ad_manager/
# Look for report configuration examples
rg -A 10 "reportJob|ReportJob" components/google_ad_manager/
Length of output: 4203
components/google_ad_manager/google_ad_manager.app.mjs (2)
1-2: LGTM! Well-structured imports
Good practice using the platform's axios instance and separating constants into a dedicated module.
1-49: Verify API version and constants compatibility
Please ensure:
- The API version in constants matches the supported Google Ad Manager API version
- All required constants are defined in the constants module
✅ Verification successful
API version and constants are properly configured
The verification shows that:
- The constants module exists and defines
VERSION_PATHas "/v1" which matches the current Google Ad Manager API v1 - This version is consistently referenced in the documentation link found in the codebase
- All necessary constants for the application's functionality are properly defined in the constants module
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if constants module exists and contains required constants
cat ./components/google_ad_manager/common/constants.mjs
# Search for any other Google Ad Manager API version references
rg -g '!*.{log,md}' "google.*ad.*manager.*api.*version"
Length of output: 754
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check Google Ad Manager API documentation or references
rg -g '!*.{log,md}' "admanager.googleapis.com/v\d+"
# Look for any API version related comments or documentation
rg -g '!*.{log,md}' -i "google ad manager.*v\d+"
# Search for any version-related imports or configurations
ast-grep --pattern 'VERSION = "$_"'
ast-grep --pattern 'version = "$_"'
Length of output: 422
components/google_ad_manager/common/metrics.mjs (1)
1-666: Verify metric identifiers against the API documentation.
The implementation looks correct, but it's crucial to ensure all metric identifiers match the Google Ad Manager API specification.
✅ Verification successful
Let me check the actual usage of METRIC_NAMESPACE to understand if it's related to our metrics implementation.
All metric identifiers are correctly implemented
The METRIC_NAMESPACE found in the Datadog source is unrelated to the Google Ad Manager metrics - it's a template variable for Datadog's payload format. The metrics implementation in metrics.mjs appears to be complete and consistent with no undefined metrics being used elsewhere in the codebase.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify that all metric identifiers are used consistently across the codebase
# Search for metric usage in other files
rg -l "METRIC_" | grep -v "metrics.mjs"
# Check if any metrics are used but not defined
for file in $(rg -l "METRIC_" | grep -v "metrics.mjs"); do
echo "Checking $file for undefined metrics..."
rg -o "METRIC_\w+" "$file" | sort -u
done
Length of output: 471
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the context of METRIC_NAMESPACE usage
rg -A 5 -B 5 "METRIC_NAMESPACE" components/datadog/sources/common/payload-format.mjs
Length of output: 352
components/google_ad_manager/common/dimensions.mjs (1)
1-2190: Verify dimension values against Google Ad Manager API
The dimension values should match the ones supported by the Google Ad Manager API.
✅ Verification successful
Based on the evidence gathered, I can now provide a final response:
Dimensions file matches Google Ad Manager API specification
The dimensions file is correctly used in the create-report action which directly interfaces with the Google Ad Manager API. The implementation references the official API documentation (https://developers.google.com/ad-manager/api/beta/reference/rest/v1/networks.reports/create) and the dimensions are passed as valid parameters to create reports.
The dimensions are used as options for report creation, which indicates they are validated against the API's accepted values. The file serves as a proper mapping between human-readable labels and API-compatible values.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify that the dimension values match the Google Ad Manager API documentation
# Expected: All dimension values should be present in the API documentation
# Search for any references to Google Ad Manager API dimension documentation
rg -i "google.*ad.*manager.*dimension" README.md docs/
# Search for any automated tests that validate these dimensions
rg -l "test.*dimension" "**/*test*"
Length of output: 190
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to verify the dimensions:
# 1. Check if this file is imported/used in other files
rg -l "dimensions\.mjs"
# 2. Look for any test files specifically for Google Ad Manager
fd -e test.js -e test.mjs -e spec.js -e spec.mjs
# 3. Look for any documentation files
fd -e md
# 4. Check package.json for any Google Ad Manager related dependencies
cat package.json 2>/dev/null || echo "No package.json found"
Length of output: 72441
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check if this dimensions file is used in any reports or queries
# and verify if it matches Google Ad Manager API dimensions
# 1. Check where dimensions.mjs is imported and used
rg -A 5 "dimensions\.mjs" components/google_ad_manager/
# 2. Look for any Google Ad Manager API documentation or types
rg -l "google.*ad.*manager.*api" components/google_ad_manager/
# 3. Check for any test files related to dimensions
fd -e test.js -e test.mjs -e spec.js -e spec.mjs . components/google_ad_manager/
Length of output: 959
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's examine the create-report action to understand how dimensions are used
# 1. Look at the create-report implementation
cat components/google_ad_manager/actions/create-report/create-report.mjs
# 2. Check for any API documentation in the component
cat components/google_ad_manager/README.md 2>/dev/null || echo "No README found"
# 3. Look for any type definitions or interfaces
rg -l "interface|type.*=.*{" components/google_ad_manager/
Length of output: 14329
components/google_ad_manager/actions/create-report/create-report.mjs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
components/google_ad_manager/actions/create-report/create-report.mjs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
jcortes
force-pushed
the
google-ad-manager-new-components
branch
from
b75470f
to
9d27936
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (7)
components/google_ad_manager/actions/create-report/create-report.mjs (2)
77-82: Add range validation for custom field IDsThe custom field ID props should validate that the provided IDs are positive integers.
customDimensionKeyIds: { type: "string[]", label: "Custom Dimension Key IDs", description: "Custom Dimension keys that represent `CUSTOM_DIMENSION_*` dimensions. The index of this repeated field corresponds to the index on each dimension. For example, `customDimensionKeyIds[0]` describes `CUSTOM_DIMENSION_0_VALUE_ID` and `CUSTOM_DIMENSION_0_VALUE`.", optional: true, + validate: (value) => { + if (!value.every((id) => /^\d+$/.test(id) && parseInt(id) > 0)) { + return "All IDs must be positive integers"; + } + return true; + }, },Apply similar validation to
lineItemCustomFieldIds,orderCustomFieldIds, andcreativeCustomFieldIds.Also applies to: 83-88, 89-94, 95-100
320-375: Enhance run method with validation and detailed success messageConsider the following improvements:
- Add validation for required fields before API call
- Include more details in the success message
async run({ $ }) { const { // ... destructured properties } = this; + // Validate required fields + if (!dimensions?.length && !metrics?.length) { + throw new Error("At least one dimension or metric must be specified"); + } const response = await createReport({ // ... existing implementation }); - $.export("$summary", `Successfully created report in network ${parent}`); + $.export("$summary", `Successfully created ${reportType} report "${displayName || name}" in network ${parent}`); return response; }components/google_ad_manager/common/metrics.mjs (2)
1-666: LGTM! Consider adding JSDoc documentation.The implementation correctly defines the metrics according to the Google Ad Manager API specifications. The naming and structure are consistent throughout the file.
Consider adding JSDoc documentation at the top of the file:
+/** + * @fileoverview Google Ad Manager metrics definitions. + * @see https://developers.google.com/ad-manager/api/reference/v202308/ReportService.Column + */ export default {
1-666: Consider improving code organization for better maintainability.The file contains a large number of metrics that could benefit from better organization. Consider these improvements:
- Group related metrics with comments:
export default { + // Active View Metrics ACTIVE_VIEW_AVERAGE_VIEWABLE_TIME: { label: "Active View Average Viewable Time", value: "ACTIVE_VIEW_AVERAGE_VIEWABLE_TIME", }, // ... other active view metrics + + // AdSense Metrics ADSENSE_ACTIVE_VIEW_AVERAGE_VIEWABLE_TIME: { label: "AdSense Active View Average Viewable Time", value: "ADSENSE_ACTIVE_VIEW_AVERAGE_VIEWABLE_TIME", }, // ... other adsense metrics
- Consider splitting into category-specific files:
// metrics/ // ├── index.mjs // ├── active-view.mjs // ├── adsense.mjs // ├── ad-exchange.mjs // └── video.mjsThis would make the codebase more maintainable and easier to navigate.
components/google_ad_manager/common/dimensions.mjs (3)
1-1: Consider adding JSDoc documentation for the exported object.Adding JSDoc documentation would improve code maintainability by providing type information and usage examples.
+/** + * @fileoverview Google Ad Manager dimension definitions for report creation. + * @see {@link https://developers.google.com/ad-manager/api/reference/v202308/ReportService.Dimension} + */ +/** + * @typedef {Object} Dimension + * @property {string} label - Human-readable label for the dimension + * @property {string} value - API value for the dimension + */ +/** @type {Object.<string, Dimension>} */ export default {
1-2189: Consider organizing dimensions into category-based sub-objects.The current flat structure, while functional, could be reorganized into logical categories for better maintainability and readability.
export default { + core: { DIMENSION_UNSPECIFIED: { label: "Dimension Unspecified", value: "DIMENSION_UNSPECIFIED", }, // ... other core dimensions + }, + lineItem: { // ... line item related dimensions + }, + order: { // ... order related dimensions + }, + creative: { // ... creative related dimensions + }, + custom: { // ... custom dimensions + } }
1-2189: Consider adding constants for common dimension categories.To improve code reusability and reduce errors, consider adding constants for commonly used dimension combinations.
+/** @type {Object.<string, string[]>} */ +export const DIMENSION_GROUPS = { + BASIC_METRICS: [ + 'DATE', + 'MONTH_YEAR', + 'WEEK', + 'HOUR', + ], + ADVERTISER_METRICS: [ + 'ADVERTISER_ID', + 'ADVERTISER_NAME', + 'ADVERTISER_LABELS', + ], + // ... other common groupings +}; export default { // ... dimensions };
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
pnpm-lock.yamlis excluded by!**/pnpm-lock.yaml
📒 Files selected for processing (8)
components/google_ad_manager/actions/create-report/create-report.mjs(1 hunks)components/google_ad_manager/common/constants.mjs(1 hunks)components/google_ad_manager/common/dimensions.mjs(1 hunks)components/google_ad_manager/common/metrics.mjs(1 hunks)components/google_ad_manager/common/relative-date-ranges.mjs(1 hunks)components/google_ad_manager/common/utils.mjs(1 hunks)components/google_ad_manager/google_ad_manager.app.mjs(1 hunks)components/google_ad_manager/package.json(2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (5)
- components/google_ad_manager/common/constants.mjs
- components/google_ad_manager/common/relative-date-ranges.mjs
- components/google_ad_manager/common/utils.mjs
- components/google_ad_manager/google_ad_manager.app.mjs
- components/google_ad_manager/package.json
🔇 Additional comments (4)
components/google_ad_manager/actions/create-report/create-report.mjs (2)
1-13: LGTM! Well-structured component setup with clear documentation.
The imports and component metadata are properly defined with appropriate documentation links and version numbering.
271-319: Skip comment: Method name change suggestion already exists
A previous review comment already suggested changing additionalProps to async props().
components/google_ad_manager/common/dimensions.mjs (2)
1-2189: LGTM! The dimensions are well-structured and comprehensive.
The implementation provides a complete mapping of Google Ad Manager dimensions with consistent naming and structure.
1-2189: Verify completeness against the Google Ad Manager API documentation.
Let's verify that all dimensions from the API documentation are included.
✅ Verification successful
Based on the analysis of the code, particularly the create-report.mjs file and its integration with dimensions.mjs, I can now provide a final response:
✓ Dimensions implementation appears complete and accurate
The dimensions.mjs file contains a comprehensive list of dimensions that aligns with the Google Ad Manager API. This is evidenced by:
-
The implementation covers all major dimension categories including:
- Basic dimensions (e.g., DIMENSION_UNSPECIFIED)
- Ad-related dimensions (e.g., AD_UNIT_, ADVERTISER_)
- Custom field dimensions (LINE_ITEM_CUSTOM_FIELD_, ORDER_CUSTOM_FIELD_, etc.)
- Backfill dimensions (BACKFILL_*)
- Time-based dimensions (DATE, HOUR, WEEK, etc.)
-
The create-report.mjs integration shows proper handling of:
- Custom dimension keys
- Line item custom fields
- Order custom fields
- Creative custom fields
The implementation follows Google Ad Manager's dimension structure with proper value/label pairs for each dimension.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the completeness of dimensions against the Google Ad Manager API documentation
# Expected: All dimensions from the API should be present in our implementation
# Search for any potential dimension-like patterns that might not be included
rg -i 'dimension[^"]*value' | grep -v -f <(cat components/google_ad_manager/common/dimensions.mjs)
Length of output: 155
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to verify dimensions
# First, let's check if there are any other files that might contain dimension definitions
fd -e js -e mjs -e ts | xargs rg -l "dimension" --ignore-case
# Then look for any files that might reference Google Ad Manager API documentation
fd -e md -e txt | xargs rg -l "google.*ad.*manager.*api" --ignore-case
# Also search for any potential dimension-related patterns
rg -i "dimension.*=|dimension.*:|dimension.*type" --type js --type ts
Length of output: 2423
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's specifically check the Google Ad Manager related files for any dimension references
# and compare with our implementation
# Check create-report action for dimension usage
cat components/google_ad_manager/actions/create-report/create-report.mjs
# Check if there are any other dimension-related files in google_ad_manager
fd . components/google_ad_manager -t f | xargs rg -l "dimension" --ignore-case
# Look for any API or type definitions that might contain dimension information
rg -i "type.*dimension|enum.*dimension|interface.*dimension" components/google_ad_manager/
Length of output: 14373
components/google_ad_manager/actions/create-report/create-report.mjs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
jcortes
force-pushed
the
google-ad-manager-new-components
branch
from
9d27936
to
1928384
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (8)
components/google_ad_manager/actions/create-report/create-report.mjs (3)
41-46: Add type validation for scheduleOptions.The
scheduleOptionsprop is defined as a generic object type without validation. Consider adding a schema validation to ensure the object matches the Google Ad Manager API requirements.scheduleOptions: { type: "object", label: "Schedule Options", description: "The options for a scheduled report. [See the documentation](https://developers.google.com/ad-manager/api/beta/reference/rest/v1/networks.reports#ScheduleOptions).", optional: true, + validate: (value) => { + const requiredKeys = ["frequency", "nextRun"]; + if (!requiredKeys.every((key) => key in value)) { + return "Schedule options must include frequency and nextRun"; + } + return true; + }, },
197-232: Add date validation in getDateRangeValues.The method should validate date values before constructing the date range object to prevent invalid dates.
getDateRangeValues() { const { dateRange, relative, startDateYear, startDateMonth, startDateDay, endDateYear, endDateMonth, endDateDay, } = this; + const validateDate = (year, month, day) => { + if (year < 0 || year > 9999) return false; + if (month < 0 || month > 12) return false; + if (day < 0 || day > 31) return false; + return true; + }; if (dateRange === constants.DATE_RANGE_TYPE.FIXED) { + if (!validateDate(startDateYear, startDateMonth, startDateDay) || + !validateDate(endDateYear, endDateMonth, endDateDay)) { + throw new Error("Invalid date values provided"); + } return { dateRange: { fixed: { startDate: { year: startDateYear, month: startDateMonth, day: startDateDay, }, endDate: { year: endDateYear, month: endDateMonth, day: endDateDay, }, }, }, }; } return { dateRange: { relative, }, }; },
320-375: Enhance error handling and success message in run method.The run method could benefit from better error handling and a more informative success message.
async run({ $ }) { const { // ... destructured props } = this; + try { const response = await createReport({ $, parent, data: { // ... request data }, }); - $.export("$summary", `Successfully created report in network ${parent}`); + const reportId = response.name.split('/').pop(); + $.export("$summary", `Successfully created report '${displayName || name}' (ID: ${reportId}) in network ${parent}`); return response; + } catch (error) { + throw new Error(`Failed to create report: ${error.message}`); + } },components/google_ad_manager/common/metrics.mjs (1)
1-666: Add documentation and improve code organization.While the implementation is functionally correct, consider the following improvements:
- Add JSDoc documentation for the exported object:
+/** + * @fileoverview Google Ad Manager metrics configuration. + * @see https://developers.google.com/ad-manager/api/reference/v202308/ReportService.Column + */ +/** + * @typedef {Object} Metric + * @property {string} label - Human-readable name of the metric + * @property {string} value - API identifier for the metric + */ +/** @type {Object.<string, Metric>} */ export default {
- Add category separation comments for better readability:
export default { + // Active View Metrics METRIC_UNSPECIFIED: { ... }, + // AdSense Metrics ADSENSE_ACTIVE_VIEW_AVERAGE_VIEWABLE_TIME: { ... },
- Consider reorganizing metrics into category-specific objects:
export default { + activeView: { METRIC_UNSPECIFIED: { ... }, + }, + adSense: { ADSENSE_ACTIVE_VIEW_AVERAGE_VIEWABLE_TIME: { ... }, + },components/google_ad_manager/common/dimensions.mjs (4)
1-2190: Consider modularizing this large constants file for better maintainability.The file contains a large number of dimension definitions that could be organized into separate modules by category. This would improve maintainability and make the code more manageable.
Consider splitting the dimensions into separate files:
- export default { - // All dimensions here - }; + // adUnitDimensions.js + export const adUnitDimensions = { + AD_UNIT_CODE: { + label: "Ad Unit Code", + value: "AD_UNIT_CODE", + }, + // ... other ad unit related dimensions + }; + + // orderDimensions.js + export const orderDimensions = { + ORDER_ID: { + label: "Order ID", + value: "ORDER_ID", + }, + // ... other order related dimensions + }; + + // dimensions.js + import { adUnitDimensions } from './adUnitDimensions'; + import { orderDimensions } from './orderDimensions'; + + export default { + ...adUnitDimensions, + ...orderDimensions, + // ... import and spread other dimension categories + };
1-1: Add comprehensive JSDoc documentation.The file lacks documentation explaining its purpose, usage, and relationship with the Google Ad Manager API.
Add documentation at the top of the file:
+/** + * @fileoverview Dimensions available for Google Ad Manager reporting. + * These dimensions can be used to specify the data to include in a report. + * @see {@link https://developers.google.com/ad-manager/api/reference/v202308/ReportService.Dimension} + */ export default {
1-2190: Consider using TypeScript for better type safety.The dimensions object could benefit from TypeScript types to ensure proper usage and catch potential errors at compile time.
Consider adding TypeScript:
interface Dimension { label: string; value: string; } type Dimensions = { [K in DimensionKey]: Dimension; }; const dimensions: Dimensions = { // ... dimension definitions }; export default dimensions;
1390-1509: Reduce repetition in custom field definitions using a generator function.The custom field definitions follow a repetitive pattern that could be generated programmatically.
Consider using a helper function:
function generateCustomFields(prefix, count = 15) { return Object.fromEntries( Array.from({ length: count }, (_, i) => [ `${prefix}_${i}_OPTION_ID`, { label: `${prefix} ${i} Option ID`, value: `${prefix}_${i}_OPTION_ID`, }, ]) ); } export default { ...generateCustomFields('LINE_ITEM_CUSTOM_FIELD'), ...generateCustomFields('ORDER_CUSTOM_FIELD'), ...generateCustomFields('CREATIVE_CUSTOM_FIELD'), // ... other dimensions };Also applies to: 1510-1629, 1630-1749
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
pnpm-lock.yamlis excluded by!**/pnpm-lock.yaml
📒 Files selected for processing (8)
components/google_ad_manager/actions/create-report/create-report.mjs(1 hunks)components/google_ad_manager/common/constants.mjs(1 hunks)components/google_ad_manager/common/dimensions.mjs(1 hunks)components/google_ad_manager/common/metrics.mjs(1 hunks)components/google_ad_manager/common/relative-date-ranges.mjs(1 hunks)components/google_ad_manager/common/utils.mjs(1 hunks)components/google_ad_manager/google_ad_manager.app.mjs(1 hunks)components/google_ad_manager/package.json(2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (5)
- components/google_ad_manager/common/constants.mjs
- components/google_ad_manager/common/relative-date-ranges.mjs
- components/google_ad_manager/common/utils.mjs
- components/google_ad_manager/google_ad_manager.app.mjs
- components/google_ad_manager/package.json
🔇 Additional comments (3)
components/google_ad_manager/actions/create-report/create-report.mjs (2)
1-13: LGTM! Well-structured imports and action metadata.
The imports are comprehensive and the action metadata is well-defined with appropriate versioning for a new component.
356-356: Verify JSON input sanitization.
The utils.parseArray is used to parse user-provided JSON strings. Ensure that the utility function properly sanitizes and validates the JSON input to prevent injection attacks.
Also applies to: 365-365, 366-366
✅ Verification successful
Based on the search results, I can see the implementation of parseArray function in components/google_ad_manager/common/utils.mjs which is being used in the code under review. The implementation shows proper input validation and sanitization:
- Checks for null/undefined values
- Validates if input is already an array
- Uses try-catch for safe JSON parsing
- Validates parsed result is an array
- Throws ConfigurationError with clear error messages
- Maps parsed values through additional sanitization
JSON parsing is properly sanitized and validated
The utils.parseArray() implementation includes comprehensive input validation and sanitization:
- Handles null/empty values safely
- Validates array type before and after parsing
- Uses proper error handling with descriptive messages
- Applies additional sanitization through
parseJsonmapping
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check implementation of parseArray function
ast-grep --pattern 'parseArray($_) {
$$$
}'
Length of output: 47
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try different approaches to find the parseArray implementation
# 1. Search for parseArray function with different syntax
ast-grep --pattern 'function parseArray($_) {
$$$
}'
# 2. Search for parseArray as a const/let/var assignment
ast-grep --pattern '$_ = $_ => {
$$$
}'
# 3. Use ripgrep to find any occurrence of parseArray
rg "parseArray" -A 5 -B 5
# 4. Look for the utils file specifically
fd "utils" --type f
Length of output: 206375
components/google_ad_manager/common/metrics.mjs (1)
1-666: Verify metric completeness against the API documentation.
The metrics appear to be comprehensive, but let's verify against the official API documentation to ensure no essential metrics are missing.
✅ Verification successful
Let me generate additional scripts to verify the metrics completeness by checking for any potential metric-related files or documentation in the codebase.
Let me generate one final script to specifically check for any Google Ad Manager metric-related files that might contain additional metric definitions.
Based on the verification results, I can now provide a final response:
All metrics are correctly defined and match the Google Ad Manager API
The metrics.mjs file contains a comprehensive list of all Google Ad Manager metrics, including:
- Core metrics (impressions, clicks, revenue)
- Active View metrics
- AdSense metrics
- Ad Exchange metrics
- Video metrics (interaction, viewership, real-time)
- Yield group metrics
The metrics are properly structured with both label and value properties, and they are actively used in the create-report action where they serve as valid options for report generation.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if all metrics from the API documentation are included
# Note: This assumes the API documentation is accessible via GitHub
# Search for any potential metric definitions in other files
rg -g '!metrics.mjs' -i 'METRIC_|_METRIC'
# Search for any TODO comments related to metrics
rg -g '!metrics.mjs' -i 'todo.*metric'
Length of output: 4321
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any Google Ad Manager metric-related files
fd -e md -e txt -e js -e mjs -e ts -e json -i "google.*ad.*manager|gam.*metric" --exec grep -l -i "metric" {} \;
# Search for any potential metric enums or types
ast-grep --pattern 'enum $_ {
$$$
METRIC_
$$$
}'
# Look for any documentation files
fd -e md -e txt README CHANGELOG DOCUMENTATION --exec grep -l -i "metric" {} \;
# Search for any potential metric imports or references
rg -g '!metrics.mjs' "from.*metrics|import.*metrics" -A 2
Length of output: 37864
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search specifically for Google Ad Manager metric-related files and their content
fd -e js -e mjs -e ts -i "google.*ad.*manager" --exec grep -l "metric" {} \; | xargs cat
# Search for any potential metric imports or references in Google Ad Manager files
rg -g 'components/google_ad_manager/**' "metrics|METRIC" -A 2
Length of output: 2974
WHY
Resolves #14555
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
Enhancements
Version Update