[Components] Parsera: added new action components #14156
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 changes introduce new actions for the Parsera application, specifically for data extraction and parsing. Two new files, Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant User
participant ParseraAPI
participant ExtractAction
participant ParseAction
User->>ExtractAction: Request data extraction
ExtractAction->>ParseraAPI: POST /extract
ParseraAPI-->>ExtractAction: Return extracted data
ExtractAction-->>User: Provide extraction result
User->>ParseAction: Request data parsing
ParseAction->>ParseraAPI: POST /parse
ParseraAPI-->>ParseAction: Return parsed data
ParseAction-->>User: Provide parsing result
Assessment against linked issues
Suggested labels
Poem
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: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (8)
components/parsera/actions/parse/parse.mjs (3)
1-8: LGTM! Consider adding more details to the description.The import statement and action metadata look good. The description includes a link to the documentation, which is excellent. However, you might want to add a brief explanation of what "pre-defined attributes" means in this context to make it clearer for users.
9-22: LGTM! Consider adding validation for the content prop.The props definition looks good and aligns with the action's purpose. The content prop's description with an example is helpful. Consider adding a validation check for the content prop to ensure it's not empty or too large.
You could add a
minLengthandmaxLengthto the content prop definition:content: { type: "string", label: "Content", description: "The content to parse. HTML or text content. Eg. `<h1>Hello World</h1>`.", + minLength: 1, + maxLength: 1000000, // Adjust this value based on your API limits },
46-49: Consider enhancing the summary message.The method correctly returns the response from the parse operation. However, the summary message is quite generic. Consider enhancing it to provide more specific information about the parsing result, such as the number of attributes successfully parsed or any other relevant details from the response.
For example:
$.export("$summary", `Successfully parsed content with ${response.attributes.length} attributes.`);components/parsera/actions/extract/extract.mjs (2)
3-28: LGTM: Action definition is well-structured and aligns with objectives.The action definition includes all necessary properties and aligns well with the PR objectives. The props cover the required inputs for the extract action as per the Parsera API documentation.
Consider adding input validation for the URL prop to ensure it's a valid URL before sending the request. This could prevent potential errors and improve user experience. For example:
url: { type: "string", label: "URL", description: "The URL to extract information from.", validate: (url) => { try { new URL(url); return true; } catch (error) { return "Please enter a valid URL"; } }, },
37-55: LGTM with suggestions: Run function is well-implemented but could be improved.The
runfunction correctly implements the extract action, including proper handling of attributes parsing and exporting a summary message. However, there are a few areas that could be improved:
Error Handling: Consider adding try-catch blocks to handle potential errors during the API call or data processing.
Input Validation: It might be beneficial to validate the
urlandattributesbefore making the API call.Response Handling: The function could check the response status and structure before returning it.
Here's a suggested improvement:
async run({ $ }) { const { extract, url, attributes, proxyCountry, } = this; if (!url) { throw new Error("URL is required"); } let parsedAttributes; try { parsedAttributes = Array.isArray(attributes) ? attributes.map(JSON.parse) : attributes; } catch (error) { throw new Error("Invalid JSON in attributes"); } try { const response = await extract({ $, data: { url, attributes: parsedAttributes, proxy_country: proxyCountry, }, }); if (response.status !== "success") { throw new Error(`API returned error: ${response.message || "Unknown error"}`); } $.export("$summary", "Successfully extracted data from url."); return response; } catch (error) { $.export("$summary", `Failed to extract data: ${error.message}`); throw error; } }This version includes input validation, better error handling, and checks the response status.
components/parsera/parsera.app.mjs (3)
24-28: LGTM: Well-defined attributes property with a suggestion.The
attributesproperty is correctly defined as a string array with an appropriate label and description. The example in the description is helpful for users. This implementation aligns with the PR objectives by allowing users to specify attributes for extraction or parsing.Consider adding a validation function to ensure that each attribute string is a valid JSON object. This could prevent runtime errors when processing the attributes. Here's a suggested implementation:
attributes: { type: "string[]", label: "Attributes", description: "List of attributes to extract or parse from the content. Format each attribute as a JSON string. Eg. `{\"name\": \"Title\",\"description\": \"News title\"}`.", validate: (attributes) => { if (!Array.isArray(attributes)) { throw new Error("Attributes must be an array"); } attributes.forEach((attr, index) => { try { JSON.parse(attr); } catch (e) { throw new Error(`Attribute at index ${index} is not a valid JSON string`); } }); }, },
31-33: LGTM: Correct implementation of getUrl method with a suggestion.The
getUrlmethod correctly constructs the full API endpoint URL by prepending the base URL to the given path.Consider making the base URL configurable, either through the app's configuration or as an environment variable. This would improve flexibility, especially if there's a need to switch between different environments (e.g., staging, production). Here's a suggested implementation:
getUrl(path) { const baseUrl = this.baseUrl || "https://api.parsera.org/v1"; return `${baseUrl}${path}`; },Then, you could set
baseUrlin the app's configuration or read it from an environment variable.
41-60: LGTM: Well-implemented API request methods with a suggestion for improvement.The
_makeRequest,post, andlistProxyCountriesmethods are well-structured and provide a good foundation for making API requests. The use of default parameters and spread syntax offers flexibility, and the methods align well with the PR objectives.Consider adding error handling to the
_makeRequestmethod to provide more informative error messages and potentially retry logic for transient errors. Here's a suggested implementation:async _makeRequest({ $ = this, path, headers, maxRetries = 3, ...args } = {}) { let retries = 0; while (retries < maxRetries) { try { return await axios($, { ...args, url: this.getUrl(path), headers: this.getHeaders(headers), }); } catch (error) { if (error.response && error.response.status >= 500 && retries < maxRetries - 1) { retries++; await new Promise(resolve => setTimeout(resolve, 1000 * retries)); } else { throw new Error(`Request failed: ${error.message}`); } } } }This implementation adds retry logic for 5xx errors and provides more informative error messages.
📜 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 (4)
- components/parsera/actions/extract/extract.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/parsera/actions/parse/parse.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/parsera/package.json (2 hunks)
- components/parsera/parsera.app.mjs (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (13)
components/parsera/package.json (3)
3-3: Version update looks good.The version bump from 0.0.1 to 0.1.0 is appropriate for adding new features (action components) in a backwards-compatible manner.
14-14: PublishConfig modification is correct.Setting
"access": "public"in thepublishConfigis appropriate for a public npm package. This ensures the package can be freely accessed and used by others.
15-18: New dependency looks good, but verify the version.The addition of
@pipedream/platformas a dependency is appropriate for a Pipedream component. However, please verify that 3.0.3 is the latest stable version of this package.Run the following script to check for the latest version of @pipedream/platform:
components/parsera/actions/parse/parse.mjs (3)
23-30: LGTM! The parse method is well-implemented.The parse method is concise and flexible, allowing for additional arguments to be passed. It correctly uses the app's post method with the "/parse" endpoint, which aligns with the API documentation provided in the PR objectives.
31-44: LGTM! Please clarify the attributes processing.The run method is well-structured and correctly handles the asynchronous parse operation. The data object is constructed appropriately with the content and attributes.
However, could you please clarify the purpose of the conditional processing of attributes:
attributes: Array.isArray(attributes) && attributes.map(JSON.parse),This will only process the attributes if they are an array, and it assumes each attribute is a JSON string. Is this the intended behavior? If so, consider adding a comment explaining this requirement.
1-50: Overall, excellent implementation of the Parse action.The Parse action has been implemented successfully, meeting the requirements specified in the PR objectives. The code is well-structured, follows good practices, and aligns with the provided API documentation. The suggested improvements are minor and aimed at enhancing clarity, robustness, and user experience.
Great job on this implementation!
components/parsera/actions/extract/extract.mjs (3)
1-1: LGTM: Import statement is correct.The import of the
appmodule from the relative path is appropriate for this action file.
29-35: LGTM: Extract method is well-implemented.The
extractmethod is correctly implemented using theapp.post()function to send a request to the "/extract" endpoint. The use of default empty object forargsis a good practice for handling optional parameters.
1-56: Overall assessment: Well-implemented Extract action with room for minor improvements.The
extract.mjsfile successfully implements the Extract action for Parsera, aligning well with the PR objectives. The code is well-structured and follows good practices. The action correctly interacts with the Parsera API to extract data from a given URL.Key strengths:
- Clear and descriptive action definition
- Proper use of the app module for API interactions
- Flexible handling of attributes
Suggestions for improvement:
- Enhance error handling in the run function
- Add input validation for the URL and attributes
- Implement more robust response handling
These improvements would further enhance the reliability and user-friendliness of the action. Overall, this is a solid implementation that meets the requirements of the PR.
components/parsera/parsera.app.mjs (4)
1-1: LGTM: Appropriate import for HTTP requests.The import of
axiosfrom "@pipedream/platform" is correct and necessary for making HTTP requests in this module.
7-23: LGTM: Well-implemented proxyCountry property.The
proxyCountryproperty is well-defined with appropriate type, label, and description. The asyncoptionsmethod is a good approach for fetching available proxy countries dynamically. This implementation aligns with the PR objectives by providing additional configuration for API requests.
34-40: LGTM: Well-implemented getHeaders method.The
getHeadersmethod is correctly implemented. It sets the appropriate Content-Type, includes the API key from the authentication data, and allows for additional headers to be passed and merged. This implementation provides good flexibility for different types of requests.
1-63: Overall, well-implemented changes with room for minor improvements.The changes to
parsera.app.mjsalign well with the PR objectives of adding new action components for Parsera. The new properties and methods provide a solid foundation for interacting with the Parsera API, including proxy country selection and attribute specification.Key strengths:
- Well-structured and reusable API request methods.
- Proper use of Pipedream's prop definitions.
- Clear alignment with the PR objectives.
Suggestions for improvement:
- Add validation for the
attributesproperty.- Make the base URL in
getUrlconfigurable.- Enhance error handling and add retry logic in
_makeRequest.These changes significantly enhance the Parsera component's functionality and usability.
WHY
Resolves #14136
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation