feat: support base record comments#1043
Open
zgz2048 wants to merge 2 commits into
Open
Conversation
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe ChangesBase Comment Feature
Sequence DiagramsequenceDiagram
participant CLI as CLI User
participant Parser as parseBaseCommentAnchor
participant Builder as buildBaseCommentCreateV2Request
participant DriveAPI as Drive API (POST /files/:file_token/new_comments)
CLI->>Parser: parse `--block-id` TABLE!RECORD!VIEW
Parser->>Builder: return base anchor {block_id, base_record_id, base_view_id}
Builder->>DriveAPI: POST new_comments (file_type=bitable, anchor)
DriveAPI-->>CLI: response {comment_id, reply_id, created_at, ...}
Estimated code review effort🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~25 minutes Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Poem
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
github-actions
Bot
added
domain/ccm
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1043 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 67.75% 67.79% +0.04%
==========================================
Files 590 590
Lines 55188 55293 +105
==========================================
+ Hits 37392 37487 +95
- Misses 14684 14688 +4
- Partials 3112 3118 +6 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@shortcuts/drive/drive_add_comment.go`:
- Around line 151-154: When docRef.Kind == "base" in drive_add_comment.go the
code currently returns early after calling parseBaseCommentAnchor(runtime) and
skips validation of Base-incompatible flags; update the block around docRef.Kind
== "base" (the parseBaseCommentAnchor(runtime) call) to first check the boolean
flags corresponding to --full-comment and --selection-with-ellipsis (the fields
used later by Execute) and return a clear error if either is set, then call
parseBaseCommentAnchor(runtime) and return its error as before so Base targets
are rejected when incompatible flags are provided.
In `@skill-template/domains/drive.md`:
- Line 128: Update the guidance sentence "如果 wiki 解析后不是
`doc`/`docx`/`bitable`，不要用 `+add-comment`。" so it matches actual +add-comment
support: include `file`/`sheet`/`slides` (or replace the explicit list with a
statement saying "仅当解析类型支持评论（例如 doc/docx/bitable/file/sheet/slides）时使用
+add-comment") so the documented resolved-type list aligns with the +add-comment
command behavior; locate and edit that exact sentence in
skill-template/domains/drive.md.
In `@skills/lark-drive/references/lark-drive-add-comment.md`:
- Line 6: The overview currently states that omitting --block-id creates a
full-document comment for all supported types; update this to scope the
full-comment default only to types that support it (e.g., docs, docx, sheets,
slides, whitelisted Drive files) and explicitly call out that Base (bitable)
requires --block-id and does not support full-document comments. Edit the
sentence referencing "--block-id" to note the exception for Base (bitable) and
enumerate which URL/token types can use full comments versus which always
require a block id.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 0bca2319-4f20-4f5a-9d1f-5c800111c8de
📒 Files selected for processing (7)
shortcuts/drive/drive_add_comment.goshortcuts/drive/drive_add_comment_test.goskill-template/domains/drive.mdskills/lark-drive/SKILL.mdskills/lark-drive/references/lark-drive-add-comment.mdtests/cli_e2e/drive/coverage.mdtests/cli_e2e/drive/drive_add_comment_dryrun_test.go
🚀 PR Preview Install Guide🧰 CLI updatenpm i -g https://pkg.pr.new/larksuite/cli/@larksuite/cli@cc4983ab4266ad53173efd314da0aec0ca6f26f3🧩 Skill updatenpx skills add zgz2048/cli#codex/base-comment-support -y -g |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Caution
Some comments are outside the diff and can’t be posted inline due to platform limitations.
⚠️ Outside diff range comments (1)
shortcuts/drive/drive_add_comment.go (1)
608-616:⚠️ Potential issue | 🟠 Major | ⚡ Quick winReject base-only incompatibilities after wiki resolution.
Wiki targets that resolve to
bitable/basereturn here before re-running the base-specific checks added for direct targets. That means--selection-with-ellipsisis effectively ignored on the wiki path, and missing--block-id/explicit--full-commentfall through to later, less accurate errors inexecuteBaseComment/dry-run.Suggested fix
if objType == "bitable" || objType == "base" { + if runtime.Bool("full-comment") { + return resolvedCommentTarget{}, output.ErrValidation("--full-comment is not applicable for base(bitable) comments; use --block-id <table-id>!<record-id>!<view-id>") + } + if strings.TrimSpace(runtime.Str("selection-with-ellipsis")) != "" { + return resolvedCommentTarget{}, output.ErrValidation("--selection-with-ellipsis is not applicable for base(bitable) comments; use --block-id <table-id>!<record-id>!<view-id>") + } + if _, err := parseBaseCommentAnchor(runtime); err != nil { + return resolvedCommentTarget{}, err + } fmt.Fprintf(runtime.IO().ErrOut, "Resolved wiki to base: %s\n", common.MaskToken(objToken)) return resolvedCommentTarget{ DocID: objToken, FileToken: objToken, FileType: "base",🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate. In `@shortcuts/drive/drive_add_comment.go` around lines 608 - 616, The wiki-resolution path currently returns a resolvedCommentTarget for objType "bitable"/"base" before applying the same base-only validation that executeBaseComment expects, so re-run the base-specific compatibility checks (the selection-with-ellipsis validation and checks for presence of --block-id or explicit --full-comment) after wiki resolution and before returning the resolvedCommentTarget; i.e., invoke the same validation helper or inline the checks used by executeBaseComment (or call the helper that enforces base-only constraints) for the resolvedCommentTarget and return an error if they fail, then only return the resolvedCommentTarget when those validations pass.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Outside diff comments:
In `@shortcuts/drive/drive_add_comment.go`:
- Around line 608-616: The wiki-resolution path currently returns a
resolvedCommentTarget for objType "bitable"/"base" before applying the same
base-only validation that executeBaseComment expects, so re-run the
base-specific compatibility checks (the selection-with-ellipsis validation and
checks for presence of --block-id or explicit --full-comment) after wiki
resolution and before returning the resolvedCommentTarget; i.e., invoke the same
validation helper or inline the checks used by executeBaseComment (or call the
helper that enforces base-only constraints) for the resolvedCommentTarget and
return an error if they fail, then only return the resolvedCommentTarget when
those validations pass.
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 615b1602-0364-425a-af99-798a2c1a2cdb
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
shortcuts/drive/drive_add_comment.goshortcuts/drive/drive_add_comment_test.goskill-template/domains/drive.mdskills/lark-drive/references/lark-drive-add-comment.md
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Add Base record-local comment support to
drive +add-comment. Base targets can now be addressed via/base/,/bitable/, wiki links resolving tobitable, or a bare token with--type bitable/--type base.Changes
drive +add-commentparsing, validation, dry-run, and execution for Base record comments.--block-id <table-id>!<record-id>!<view-id>as the public Base locator and send the OpenAPI wire payload withfile_type=bitableplus Base anchor fields.Test Plan
go test ./shortcuts/drivemake build && go test ./tests/cli_e2e/drive -run 'TestDriveAddCommentDryRun_(File|Base)'make unit-testfile_type=bitable.Related Issues
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Behavior
Documentation
Tests