fix: allow setting request description and still gen schema

[danielgtaylor]

This PR makes the request body generation code align with the response body code, where missing fields are auto-generated, enabling you to provide partial information like the request body description when desired.

Fixes #563.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features

  • Improved initialization and handling of request body structures for better clarity and organization.

• Tests

  • Added a new test case to validate the request body description and schema generation for API operations.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The pull request introduces changes to the huma.go and huma_test.go files, focusing on the initialization and handling of the RequestBody structure in the API registration process. The modifications streamline the setup of the RequestBody, ensuring that its properties are more cohesively initialized. Additionally, a new test case is added to verify the correct functionality of the request body description and schema in the OpenAPI output.

Changes

Files	Change Summary
huma.go	Improved initialization of the RequestBody structure, consolidating property settings and ensuring readiness for media types.
huma_test.go	Added a new test case "request-body-description" to validate the request body description and schema in the OpenAPI output.

Assessment against linked issues

Objective	Addressed	Explanation
Setting up only description in requestBody (Issue #563)	✅

Possibly related PRs

• fix: race by deferring the return of buf to sync.Pool when using RawBody #542: Related to handling of request bodies, focusing on resource management within the Register function.
• fix: automatically precompute schema validation messages #545: Enhances schema validation for request bodies, directly relating to the changes in RequestBody handling.

Suggested labels

bug

Poem

🐇 In the meadow where bunnies play,
Changes sprout like flowers in May.
With RequestBody now neat and bright,
Our API shines with newfound light.
Hooray for tests that keep us strong,
In the world of code, we all belong! 🌼

---

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?

Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  -- I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  -- Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  -- @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  -- @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  -- @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  -- @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  -- @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  -- @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 88.23529% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 92.80%. Comparing base (ff80e71) to head (1954c15).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
huma.go	88.23%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #587      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   92.80%   92.80%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          22       22              
  Lines        3904     3903       -1     
==========================================
- Hits         3623     3622       -1     
  Misses        236      236              
  Partials       45       45              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 2

Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)

huma.go (1)

585-585: Improve test coverage for content type handling

The static analysis tool indicates that line 585 is not covered by tests. This line handles custom content types specified in the field tag.

To improve test coverage, consider adding a test case that includes a field with a custom content type tag. Would you like me to provide an example test case or open a GitHub issue to track this task?

Tools

GitHub Check: codecov/patch

[warning] 585-585: huma.go#L585
Added line #L585 was not covered by tests

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between ff80e71 and 1954c15.

Files selected for processing (2)

• huma.go (2 hunks)
• huma_test.go (1 hunks)

Additional context used

GitHub Check: codecov/patch

huma.go

[warning] 585-585: huma.go#L585
Added line #L585 was not covered by tests

Additional comments not posted (2)

huma.go (1)

595-597: LGTM: Proper initialization of Content map

The initialization of the Content map is correctly implemented. It ensures that the map is created if it doesn't exist, preventing potential nil pointer dereferences later in the code.

huma_test.go (1)

547-582: LGTM! The new test case aligns well with the PR objectives.

This test case effectively verifies the ability to set a description for the request body while still generating the schema. It covers the following key aspects:

1. Setting up a request body with a description.
2. Verifying the correct handling of the input body.
3. Checking the generated OpenAPI schema for the presence of the description, required flag, and correct content type.

This addition helps ensure that the changes meet the requirements outlined in issue #563.