update ai models. fix bugs #162
Conversation
|
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
|
|
Important Review skippedReview was skipped due to path filters ⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
CodeRabbit blocks several paths by default. You can override this behavior by explicitly including those paths in the path filters. For example, including You can disable this status message by setting the WalkthroughThe changes in this pull request involve modifications to several components and scripts within the application. Key alterations include the removal of tracking function calls from the Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant User
participant SuggestionsAPI
participant OpenAI
User->>SuggestionsAPI: Request suggestions
SuggestionsAPI->>OpenAI: Generate suggestions with gpt-4o-mini
OpenAI-->>SuggestionsAPI: Return suggestions
SuggestionsAPI-->>User: Deliver suggestions
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: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (13)
apps/registry/pages/api/letter.js (3)
Line range hint
1-32: Add input validation and rate limitingThe API endpoint lacks crucial security measures:
- No validation for required fields (username, jobDescription, tone)
- No rate limiting to prevent abuse
- No maximum length checks for inputs
Consider implementing the following:
+ import rateLimit from 'express-rate-limit'; + import { z } from 'zod'; + const limiter = rateLimit({ + windowMs: 15 * 60 * 1000, // 15 minutes + max: 5 // limit each IP to 5 requests per windowMs + }); + const inputSchema = z.object({ + username: z.string().min(1).max(100), + jobDescription: z.string().max(5000), + tone: z.string().max(100) + }); export default async function handler(req, res) { + try { + await limiter(req, res); + const validatedInput = inputSchema.parse(req.body); + const { username, jobDescription, tone } = validatedInput;
Line range hint
3-7: Move sensitive configuration to environment variablesThe Supabase URL is hardcoded in the source code. This should be moved to environment variables for better security and configuration management.
- const supabaseUrl = 'https://itxuhvvwryeuzuyihpkp.supabase.co'; + const supabaseUrl = process.env.SUPABASE_URL;
Line range hint
13-62: Improve error handling and add response cachingThe current implementation lacks proper error handling for API calls and database operations. Additionally, implementing caching could improve performance for repeated requests.
Consider implementing:
export default async function handler(req, res) { + try { + // Add caching check + const cacheKey = `letter:${username}:${jobDescription}:${tone}`; + const cachedResponse = await redis.get(cacheKey); + if (cachedResponse) { + return res.status(200).json(JSON.parse(cachedResponse)); + } const { data } = await supabase .from('resumes') .select() .eq('username', username); + if (!data || data.length === 0) { + return res.status(404).json({ error: 'Resume not found' }); + } // ... rest of the code ... const gptRes = await gpt.sendMessage(prompt.join('')); + + // Cache the response + await redis.setex(cacheKey, 3600, JSON.stringify(gptRes.text)); return res.status(200).send(gptRes.text); + } catch (error) { + console.error('Error generating letter:', error); + return res.status(500).json({ error: 'Failed to generate letter' }); + } }apps/registry/pages/api/suggestions.js (4)
Line range hint
61-65: Improve error handling to prevent information exposureThe current error handling could potentially expose sensitive system information to clients. The error object is returned directly without proper formatting or status code.
Apply this diff to improve error handling:
try { const content = chat.choices[0].message.content; return res.status(200).send(content); } catch (e) { console.error(e); - return e; + return res.status(500).json({ + error: 'Failed to generate suggestions', + message: process.env.NODE_ENV === 'development' ? e.message : undefined + }); }
Line range hint
1-4: Move Supabase URL to environment variablesThe Supabase URL should not be hardcoded in the source code. Move it to environment variables for better security and configuration management.
Apply this diff:
-const supabaseUrl = 'https://itxuhvvwryeuzuyihpkp.supabase.co'; +const supabaseUrl = process.env.SUPABASE_URL;
Line range hint
10-13: Add input validation and rate limitingThe API endpoint lacks input validation for the username parameter and rate limiting, which could lead to security issues and excessive costs.
Consider:
- Adding input validation for the username parameter
- Implementing rate limiting using a middleware like
express-rate-limit- Adding request size limits
Line range hint
15-53: Move prompt template to a separate fileThe large prompt template should be moved to a separate file for better maintainability and reusability.
Consider creating a
prompts/suggestions.jsfile and importing the template:// prompts/suggestions.js export const getSuggestionsPrompt = (content) => ` This is a persons resume in the JSON Resume format. ${content} // ... rest of the prompt `;apps/registry/pages/api/suggestions-beta.js (3)
Line range hint
159-164: Improve error handling and status codes.The current error handling has several issues:
- Returns 200 status code for errors, which is misleading
- Generic "it failed" message isn't helpful for debugging
- Lacks structured error response format
Consider this improvement:
} catch (e) { console.error(e); - return res.status(200).send('it failed'); + return res.status(500).json({ + error: true, + message: 'Failed to process suggestions', + details: process.env.NODE_ENV === 'development' ? e.message : undefined + }); }
Line range hint
42-43: Add input validation and rate limiting.The handler accepts user input without proper validation, which could lead to security issues:
- No validation of username format/length
- No rate limiting to prevent abuse
- No validation of brevity/sentiment values
Consider adding these safeguards:
export default async function handler(req, res) { + if (!req.body.username || typeof req.body.username !== 'string' || req.body.username.length > 100) { + return res.status(400).json({ error: 'Invalid username' }); + } + if (req.body.brevity && !Object.values(BREVITY).includes(req.body.brevity)) { + return res.status(400).json({ error: 'Invalid brevity value' }); + } const username = req.body.username || 'thomasdavis'; const brevity = req.body.brevity || BREVITY.verbose;
Line range hint
9-23: Improve code structure and documentation.The TODO comment indicates several pending improvements. Consider:
- Moving configuration to a separate file
- Adding TypeScript or JSDoc types for better maintainability
- Implementing the suggested schema improvements
Example structure:
// config/suggestions.js export const SUGGESTION_LEVELS = { CRITICAL: 'critical', WARNING: 'warning', INFO: 'info' }; export const SUGGESTION_TYPES = { SPELLING: 'spelling', GRAMMAR: 'grammar', // ... other types }; // types/suggestions.js /** * @typedef {Object} SuggestionConfig * @property {string} level - One of SUGGESTION_LEVELS * @property {string} type - One of SUGGESTION_TYPES * @property {string} sentiment - Suggestion tone * @property {string} brevity - Suggestion length */apps/registry/lib/calculations.js (1)
Line range hint
1-234: Consider additional architectural improvements.While the error handling improvements are good, consider these architectural enhancements:
- Input Validation: Consider adding a schema validation layer (e.g., using Zod or Joi) to validate the resume object structure at the entry point.
- Error Logging: Implement structured error logging instead of silently handling invalid data.
- Type Safety: Consider adding TypeScript for better type safety and developer experience.
apps/registry/scripts/jobs/gpted.js (2)
Line range hint
350-370: Enhance error handling robustnessThe current error handling could be improved in several ways:
- Add specific error types for better debugging
- Implement retry logic for transient failures
- Preserve error details in the database
Consider this improved implementation:
} catch (e) { console.error(e); + const errorDetails = { + error: e.message, + timestamp: new Date().toISOString(), + type: e.name + }; await supabase .from('jobs') .update({ - gpt_content: 'FAILED', + gpt_content: 'FAILED', + error_details: JSON.stringify(errorDetails), + retry_count: (job.retry_count || 0) + 1 }) .eq('id', job.id); + + // Retry with exponential backoff if under max retries + if ((job.retry_count || 0) < 3) { + await new Promise(resolve => + setTimeout(resolve, Math.pow(2, job.retry_count || 0) * 1000) + ); + continue; + } }
Line range hint
1-400: Consider architectural improvements for better scalabilityThe current implementation has several areas for improvement:
- Replace sequential processing with batch processing
- Implement proper rate limiting
- Add structured logging
- Remove debug console.logs
Consider these improvements:
- Add structured logging:
const winston = require('winston'); const logger = winston.createLogger({ level: 'info', format: winston.format.json(), transports: [ new winston.transports.File({ filename: 'error.log', level: 'error' }), new winston.transports.File({ filename: 'combined.log' }) ] });
- Implement batch processing:
async function processBatch(jobs, batchSize = 5) { const batches = chunk(jobs, batchSize); for (const batch of batches) { await Promise.all(batch.map(processJob)); await rateLimiter.wait(); // Implement proper rate limiting } }
- Add progress tracking:
const progress = require('cli-progress'); const bar = new progress.SingleBar({}, progress.Presets.shades_classic);Would you like me to create a separate issue to track these improvements?
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (7)
apps/registry/app/[username]/letter/page.js(0 hunks)apps/registry/app/[username]/suggestions/page.js(0 hunks)apps/registry/lib/calculations.js(4 hunks)apps/registry/pages/api/letter.js(1 hunks)apps/registry/pages/api/suggestions-beta.js(1 hunks)apps/registry/pages/api/suggestions.js(1 hunks)apps/registry/scripts/jobs/gpted.js(1 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (2)
- apps/registry/app/[username]/letter/page.js
- apps/registry/app/[username]/suggestions/page.js
🔇 Additional comments (7)
apps/registry/pages/api/letter.js (1)
28-28:
Verify the impact of switching to a smaller model
The change from 'gpt-4o-2024-08-06' to 'gpt-4o-mini' might affect the quality and coherence of generated cover letters. While this could improve response times and costs, it's important to validate the output quality meets expectations.
Run this script to analyze the model change impact across the codebase:
✅ Verification successful
Model change is consistent across the codebase
The change to 'gpt-4o-mini' is already consistently implemented across all GPT-using endpoints:
apps/registry/pages/api/letter.jsapps/registry/pages/api/suggestions.jsapps/registry/pages/api/suggestions-beta.jsapps/registry/scripts/jobs/gpted.js
Each file uses the same model with appropriate temperature settings (ranging from 0.7 to 0.85) for their specific use cases. This appears to be an intentional, system-wide model update rather than an isolated change.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for consistency in model usage and any related configurations
# Check for other files using ChatGPT models
echo "Checking for model usage across the codebase:"
rg -l "model.*gpt-4"
# Check for any model-specific configurations or tests
echo "Checking for model-specific configurations:"
rg -l "temperature.*0.85"
Length of output: 474
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the actual model configurations across files
echo "=== Model configuration in letter.js ==="
rg "model.*gpt-4" apps/registry/pages/api/letter.js -A 2 -B 2
echo -e "\n=== Model configuration in suggestions.js ==="
rg "model.*gpt-4" apps/registry/pages/api/suggestions.js -A 2 -B 2
echo -e "\n=== Model configuration in suggestions-beta.js ==="
rg "model.*gpt-4" apps/registry/pages/api/suggestions-beta.js -A 2 -B 2
echo -e "\n=== Model configuration in gpted.js ==="
rg "model.*gpt-4" apps/registry/scripts/jobs/gpted.js -A 2 -B 2
Length of output: 1223
apps/registry/pages/api/suggestions.js (1)
56-56:
Verify the OpenAI model name and configuration
The model name gpt-4o-mini appears to be non-standard and might cause runtime errors. Additionally, the high temperature (0.85) combined with a potentially less capable model could lead to inconsistent suggestions.
Let's verify the available models and their naming patterns:
apps/registry/pages/api/suggestions-beta.js (1)
148-148: Verify the impact of switching to gpt-4o-mini model.
The change from gpt-4o-2024-08-06 to gpt-4o-mini might affect the quality and depth of resume suggestions. Please ensure this change aligns with the expected output quality and performance requirements.
Consider:
- Documenting the rationale for this model change
- Adding model configuration to environment variables for easier switching
- Implementing A/B testing to compare suggestion quality between models
apps/registry/lib/calculations.js (3)
10-10: LGTM! Good defensive programming practice.
The addition of a default empty array for workHistory prevents potential null pointer exceptions when resume.work is undefined.
134-134: LGTM! Consistent error handling.
The addition of a default empty array for workHistory is consistent with the error handling pattern used in other functions.
42-44: Verify the impact of filtering invalid date ranges.
While filtering out invalid ranges is good for robustness, we should ensure this doesn't silently hide data issues.
Let's verify if there are any existing test cases or usages that might be affected:
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about the implementation to understand how invalid dates are handled.
Let me search for test files using a different approach.
Based on the analysis of the codebase, I can now provide the final response:
The filter for invalid date ranges is safe and necessary.
The filtering of invalid date ranges is a defensive measure that handles several edge cases correctly:
- Empty work history is handled via
resume.work || [] - The filter is applied after merging ranges, so it only removes truly invalid entries
- The code includes proper logging (
console.log({ range, mergedRanges })) to track any filtered ranges - The function gracefully handles various resume formats as seen in the theme examples
The change improves robustness without silently hiding data issues since:
- Invalid entries are logged for debugging
- The function still processes all valid work entries
- The dashboard UI shows the total number of jobs (
totalJobs: resume.work?.length) separately
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for test cases and usages of totalExperience
rg -A 5 "totalExperience\(" --type js
# Search for any test data with undefined or invalid date ranges
rg -B 5 -A 5 '"work":\s*\[' --type json
Length of output: 4021
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the full implementation of totalExperience and related functions
ast-grep --pattern 'export function totalExperience($_) {
$$$
}'
# Look for test files related to calculations
fd test calculations --exec cat {}
Length of output: 3717
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Look for test files related to calculations
fd test --extension js --extension ts --exec grep -l "calculations\|totalExperience" {} || true
# Check if there are any files that pass undefined or null work entries
rg "work.*\[\s*null|\[\s*undefined|\[\s*\]" --type js -B 2 -A 2
Length of output: 16403
apps/registry/scripts/jobs/gpted.js (1)
273-275: Consider adjusting model configuration for more reliable parsing
- The change to
gpt-4o-minimight affect parsing accuracy. Consider validating the output quality against the previous model's results. - The temperature of 0.8 is high for structured data extraction tasks. Consider lowering it to 0.2-0.3 for more consistent results.
Let's verify the impact of the model change:
| mergedRanges.forEach((range) => { | ||
| console.log({ range, mergedRanges }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Remove debugging console.log statement.
Production code should not contain debugging console.log statements as they can pollute logs and impact performance.
Apply this diff:
- console.log({ range, mergedRanges });📝 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.
| console.log({ range, mergedRanges }); |
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Chores